THE Reformed Dissenter, OR A CONFERENCE Between a Conformist AND A Separatist,( Being both Parishioners,) CONCERNING COMMUNION WITH THE Church of England.  
LONDON, Printed, and are to be Sold by Joseph Collier, at the Bible, under the Gate on London-Bridge. 1684.   

A CONFERENCE Between two PARISHIONERS, The one a CONFORMIST, The other a SEPARATIST, &c.  Separatist. 
GOOD Morrow, Neighbour; I am glad to see you; and much desire some discourse with you about your practise in holding Communion with the Parochial Assemblies.  Conformist. 
I hope, in so doing, I give no offence to any: I confess, I attend the public Worship, and hearty rejoice that I can hear Christ preached.  Separat. 
If you will walk to my House, you and I will confer a little more about this matter: For I would be glad to understand upon what Principles you act; for I confess, I have not that latitude.  comform. 
I hope you will judge charitably of me that have; for we cannot all see with the same eyes: The Apostles Rule is, Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind; and if any man be otherwise minded, God shall in time reveal it unto him. Therefore let not him that eats, despise him that eateth not; nor him that eateth not judge him that eateth.  Separat. 
You say very well: I confess, I am against Censoriousness; I am sure that's unlawful, whether Parochial Communion be or not.  comform. 
But I hope you do not take it to be unlawful to worship the most high God by prescribed Forms of Prayer, provided we cannot be permitted to do it publicly any other way.  Separat. 
Truly Sir, I am not free to oppose my Junior thoughts to your Experience; but you know what Learned Men amongst us have written against it; and I cannot answer their Arguments.  comform. 
I pray, who hath written against the lawfulness of joining with the Liturgick way of Worship, when we must disobey Authority if we meet in great numbers to worship God any other ways?  Separat. 
As I  told you before, I had rather give you the opinion of other men, than my own; and therefore I'll tell you what a Reverend Doctor saith in this matter.  comform. 
I know some learned men may be of another mind: But if Learning must serve instead of Arguments, we may turn Papists as well as Separatists; for there have many learned men wrote in defence of the Roman Church. But I pray let me hear his Arguments; for I am for proving all things, and holding fast only that which is good.  Separat. 
You say very well: For Authority without Reason signifieth nothing, or very little.  comform. 
If we should put it to the Poll, I could produce the writings and practices of above a thousand Nonconforming Ministers, in the justification of Laycommunion with the Parochial Assemblies.  Separat. 
But I pray, have you so many Nonconformists for Parochial Communion, that you could name above a thousand, whose writings or practise do approve of it as lawful?  comform. 
Yea, I doubt not but I could produce the writings and practise of the above-named number of Non-Conformists, if need were, for the lawfulness of attending the public Worship by the use of the Common Prayer, where there is but a tolerable Ministry: For it is granted by all men of great consideration, and well informed understandings, that some circumstantial imperfections in the external modes of Administration, are no just ground for a total separation from such a Church, which maintains neither heresy in Doctrine, nor Idolatry in Worship; but preserves the Substantials of Religion sound and good, as the Church of England doth. There was not five of the whole Assembly of Divines, besides the five dissenting Brethren, but what were of this mind; and the Body of London Ministers at Sion-Colledge, did correspond with those at Westminster in the above-named Proposition, except some few hot men who were leavened with the Principles of Separation, upon pretence of greater purity; which Mr Cartwright on the Proverbs, calls the White Devil. See also Mr Calamy against Burton, Mr. Case's Parliament Sermon, Mr. Dury's Epistolary Discourses, and Mr. Edwards his Gangrena, and many others.  Separat. 
But if they think Lay-communion lawful, how comes it to pass that so many of them have written of late against the mischiefs of Imposition?  comform. 
The Arguments used in such Books, may serve perhaps against Ministerial Conformity; but by no means can they serve to prove Parochial Communion sinful, when our Governours require it as a Duty, and necessitate us to use that, or none. All men know there is a vast difference between Ministration in holy things, and attendance on holy Ordinances. Private Christians are not required to subscribe to be re-ordained, and to assent and consent, as they who are Ministers are, who are admitted to a Cure of Souls. We may hear the Sermons, and the Prayers, and receive the Sacrament in a private capacity, without any of those things required of us.  Separat. 
What do you think of Ames's Fresh svit against the Ceremonies? Hath not he said enough to convince any man they are unlawful?  comform. 
It may satisfy any Person, that if our Governours thought it Convenient, they might remove many of those things out of the Church; but not to convince reading and intelligent men, that it is unlawful to attend the public Worship of God, where the substance of Religion is found and good, merely because of some modal Defects, and circumstantial Imperfections; for it is well known, that Ames himself was against a total Separation; and wrote against it, even at the same time, when he wrote against the Imposition of the Ceremonies; and tells the World, that the practise of the old Nonconformists was to attend the public Worship as far as they could without Sin; as you may see in his Character of an English Puritan.  Separat. 
But can that which is unlawfully imposed, be lawfully obeied?  comform. 
Our Question is not, what the Magistrate ought to enjoin, but how far we ought to submit: Let us study our Duty, instead of disputing his Power. Arch-bishop Usher used to say, that men ought to obey Authority in all such things which they could not give as good a reason to prove to be sinful, as they could to prove Obedience to Authority to be lawful: And I am sure, that the Nonconforming Ministers who were Commissioned by his Majesty, to consult with the Conformists about the Regulation of the Church in 1660. viz. Dr. Bates, Dr. Jacomb, Mr. Woodbridge, Mr. Cooper, Dr. Manton, Mr. Baxter, and several others, did grant that some Corruptions in the external Circumstances of Worship might be sinful in the Imposer, and voluntary Chooser, who might serve God better, and would not; and yet they might be lawfully submitted unto by such who are constrained, and necessitated to use such, or none; as may be seen in the printed History of that Affair.  Separat. 
Then I perceive you have a greater Latitude than the old Nonconformists had; for they wrote very sharply against the Surplice, and against kneeling at the Sacrament, and did very much harmonize with the Congregational men in our Dayes; and one hath lately written a Book to prove it.  comform. 
I  told you before, although they did writ against the Imposition of the Ceremonies, yet they did at the same time writ against Separation from the public Assembly upon that account: And Mr. Ball tells you, that he did not understand the Brownist of his time, who at one jump leaps both out of the Surplice and the Parish Church too. I purposely omit quoting Pages, that men may red the whole Books: See his Trial of the Grounds of Separation, and you may receive ample Satisfaction.  Separat. 
But the Case is altered now from what it was when the Presbyterians wrote against the independents; for now the terms of Communion are more difficult and hard: Then there was no Common Prayer, nor kneeling at the Sacrament, nor several other things now required.  comform. 
I grant that the Terms of Ministerial Conformity may be harder; but I pray, what is required of the people in order to Communion, which is more uneasy now, than formerly? I am sure we have more preaching now, than there was fifty years ago; and some things in the Liturgy are explained; and particularly the reason of kneeling at the Holy Sacrament, to prevent any suspicion of Idolatry; and also many of the Prayers are mended and enlarged.  Separat. 
I confess I am not against hearing a good Sermon in a Church, when I cannot hear others more to my mind: For I find Dr. Goodwin on the Ephesians, Mr. nigh in his Grand Case Resolved, Mr. Robinson, Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs, Mr. Cotton, and many other Congregational men, defend the lawfulness of hearing; but you speak as if you did not scruple kneeling at the Sacrament  comform. 
I must tell you, if I might be left to choose my own gesture at the Supper, the Case were different; but if I must take it kneeling, or not at all, I have so impartially examined most that hath been wrote on both sides, that I very much incline to be of Mr. Vines's Opinion, that Gesture is none of the Free-hold of the Ordinance, but is a thing left at liberty, to the determination of human prudence: For if the same Circumstances are required of us which the Apostles and our blessed Saviour used, we must take it leaning and not sitting; and we must receive it in a Garret, and without the company of Women, and a very small number, about Twelve; and with unleavened Bread, and with none but Ministers. If a Law should constrain me to dine, and crave a Blessing on my Meat on my knees, I should do it rather than fast, or think that I adored the Bread, because it stood before me. I red, holy Mr. Dod, the famous Nonconformist advised his own Daughter to take it kneeling, in the Epistle to Dr. Morton's Book: And Mr. banns, another Nonconformist, in his printed Letters saith, if he had twenty Scruples in his mind about it, yet he should think it lawful for the reasons there mentioned: And Mr. Corbet is of the same mind, as you may see in his Writings: And I think, where the Magistrate commands that which God hath not forbidden, and forbids that which God hath not commanded, there I may lawfully obey. Mr. bailie is of opinion, that men may as well pled for putting on their Hats, as for sitting at the Sacrament, to show their familiarity and fellowship with Christ; and Mr. Tombs takes great pains, and to very good purpose, to show that kneeling at the Supper is none of those things that have an appearance of evil: Mr. Cartwright saith, the thing is not in its own nature unlawful, that we should therefore abstain from the Sacrament, if we cannot have it otherwise: And Mr. Troughton in his Apology tells us, that the old Nonconformists disliked kneeling, yet thought it tolerable, and might be submitted to in case of necessity; as when the Law of the Land commands it, and the Law of God no where forbids it; and where there is no Law, there is no Transgression. See Mr. Ashwell's Gestus Eucharisticus, and Mr. Paybody's Book on that Subject.  Separat. 
I wonder you mention so many Authors, when one Scripture for it is worth them all.  comform. 
I name these Nonconforming Authors first, because you are so ready to name the Authority of some; and I know not why the Authority of such Eminent men as those, may not preponderate theirs: But yet I do not depend upon their Judgments barely considered; but the strength of their Reasons, grounded on Scripture, which requires humble and Reverend Gestures in the Worship of the great God: Who can question, but I may as lawfully take the Body and Blood of the Blessed Jesus upon my knees, as take a Pardon from an earthly Prince in that posture?  Separat. 
But that which makes me dislike kneeling, and other Ceremonies, is, that in the use of them we symbolise too much with the Church of Rome?  comform. 
You symbolise with the Pope in sitting; for he takes the Sacrament in that Gesture: If we must do nothing that the Church of Rome doth, we must not kneel when we pray, nor use Churches, nor sprinkle Infants. As at first under the pretence of honouring Christ, Antichrist was set up; so now under the pretence of opposing Antichrist, Christ himself is in danger of being run down, as Dr. burgess well observed. I pray red those excellent Cases of Conscience now published, relating to Parochial Communion, written by the London Ministers, amongst which you will find this Question resolved: Whether Englands Symbolizing with the Church of Rome in some things, be a just ground of Separation from the Church of England?  Separat. 
But I pray, where have you a Scripture Command for Praying by a Form, and doing several other things in the Worship of God? The Apostles Commission runs thus; Observe all things whatsoever I command you.  comform. 
We must distinguish between the Substantials of Religion, and the Circumstantials: Christ hath given plain Commands about the former, but hath as plainly left the latter to the determination of human prudence, to be directed according to the general Rules of the Word of God, containing things conducing to order and decency. I pray where have you a Scripture command for sitting at the Sacrament? for laying your right hand on the Book, and kissing it in Swearing; and yet an Oath is part of Gods Worship? for Preaching in a black Cloak, for using an Hour-glass, for singing Psalms in Rhyme, for baptizing Children by Sprinkling, for receiving the Sacrament once a month only, and at Noon rather than at Night; for ringing of Bells to call people to Church at ten a clock, for putting on your best Garments on Sundays, for standing at Prayer? These and a hundred other Circumstances, are things left undetermined by Christ and his Apostles. I wonder what Scripture Command the Scotch Covenanters had for the professing Sign of lifting up their hand to Heaven, when they took that Covenant.  Separat. 
But God forbids adding or diminishing.  comform. 
He doth so: Therefore let them take heed of it, who say that his Law forbids that which he never forbade: The Publican did not add to the Law, when he smote upon his Breast. red the Second Part of the Protestant Reconciler, and the late Case of Conscience about Indifferent things, if you would not be imposed upon in this particular.  Separat. 
I grant many things relating to the Worship of God, are left to be determined by human Prudence; but then the People ought to determine those things amongst themselves, and not be imposed upon by others.  comform. 
So they do in the English Nation; for do not you, and I, and every English man, by our Representatives in the Parliament make these Laws? and is it not reasonable we should submit to them, until our Superiors think fit to alter them?  Separat. 
I dare not give so much to the Magistrates power in matters of Religion, when I know Christ is the supreme Law-giver of his Church.  comform. 
When the Magistrate is on your side, then you magnify his power. I pray red Bishop Usher's Discourse of the Power of Princes, and red Mr. Samuel Clark's Treatise of the Power of Magistrates in Matters of Religion; wherein he gives an account of the judgement of many eminent Non-conforming Ministers in their Parliament Sermons upon this Subject: And see what Mr. Byfield on Peter, writ upon that Text, Submit to every Ordinance of man for the Lord's sake; and likewise Mr. Sprint, the old Conformist, and Dr. Seaman's Sermon before the Parliament.  Separat. 
For my part, I am afraid of apostasy, when the Word of God saith, we ought not to build the things we once destroyed; and also when I consider, If any man draw back, God's Soul shall have no pleasure in him; viz. shall abhor him.  comform. 
And I profess to you, I am as greatly afraid of wresting the holy Scriptures to my own destruction: I tremble to red that Text of Saint John, If any man add to the Sayings of this Book, God shall add to his Plagues. Now I add, when I give such a sense which the Holy Ghost never intended; I wish this be not one of the Sins for which the wise God now seems to contend with us. Let us not blame the Papists for making the Scriptures a Nose of Wax, and do the same ourselves, by telling the People, Thus saith the Lord, when it never entered into his Heart; and thereby prophesying Lies in his name. Men ought to be very careful lest they misapply Scriptures which call upon men to stand fast in the Christian Faith, to persuade them to obstinacy in a particular Opinion or Sect.  Separat. 
But it is good to keep a tender Conscience; and for my part, I cannot believe it is lawful for me to hold Communion with the Liturgick Worship; and whatsoever is not of Faith, is Sin.  comform. 
You say truly; it's good to keep a tender Conscience: And if you are fully persuaded it's unlawful for you to join in Parochial Communion, you must forbear until you can be satisfied that you may lawfully do it; for it must be granted, that no man is Master of his own persuasion, nor can any man believe what he will believe; but every man must believe what appears to the Reason of his mind to be agreeable to Truth, &c. But yet if there be doubts on both sides, viz. Whether it be lawful to Communicate, and whether it be lawful to separate, which must be the case of all men who have been true to their own Understandings in reading what hath been written on both sides; in this case it's best to take the safest side; and that is, to obey lawful Authority, which every man may be sure is his Duty, except forbidden by a higher Authority. For your further satisfaction in this case, red the first Edition of Dr. Sibs's Souls Conflict, published by himself, and Dr. Sanderson's Sermons, and Dr. Ames's Cases of Conscience about the obligation of a Doubting and Erroneous Conscience; Mr. Geree also( the old Non-conformist) in his Vindication of the Church of England, and Mr. Capel in his excellent Discourse of Temptations.  Separat. 
If a Man could exactly distinguish between a tender Conscience, and a tenacious obstinate Humour, it were well; possibly a Private Person may do it in himself, but itis hard to do it in another man.  comform. 
There may some Rules of distinguishing be laid down, whereby a man may try himself whether his Separation be the Effect of his Tenderness, or Humour; as thus: A man that's truly tender, he will act against his apparent Interest,( I mean, his Worldly Interest) to secure the peace of his own mind: But here may be a mistake; for a man may spend a great Sum of Money to defend himself against legal Prosecutions, and get well by the bargain, in pleasing those Customers and Benefactors who would not trust him if he complied with Authority, nor have so good an Opinion of him: Many men have found a great Temptation in suffering some kind of loss. Again, a man that's truly tender, will take great pains to inform himself by hearing and reading what may be said on both sides; and harken to what makes against his Opinion, as well as what makes for it. Again, such a one will be very humble and modest, and very charitable towards those who differ from him, and be very prove to suspect his own understanding, especially when he finds his judgement and practise differ from the judgement and practise of the wisest and best men that ever were in the Church of God; and they have ever looked upon a total separation from public Worship upon the occount of modal Imperfections, to be Schismatical. Again, a truly tender Conscience will look upon it as a very great Sin, to justify his practise by wrested Interpretations, and apparent misapplications of Scripture. Again, a truly tender Conscience will be afraid of one sin as well as of another, and as much dread Disobedience to the lawful Commands of Authority, as of holding Communion with corrupt Members in the Church, and think it a very great Sin to disturb the peace of the Church by Faction and Schism about small Circumstantial differences, when there is neither heresy in Doctrine, nor Idolatry in Worship. red Mr. Jeremiah Burrough's Irenicum upon this Argument; He that cannot do what he would, will do what he can; he'l not make the breach wider, nor the distance greater than he needs must, lest he should betray more of humour and Stomach, than of Conscience: He that cannot bow at the name of Jesus, yet can stand at the Creed; and if not that neither, yet he can be present at it: He that cannot kneel at the Sacrament, yet can be present at the Prayers, and he that cannot hear the Prayers, yet may hear the Sermon. The truly tender Christian, that cannot obey the Laws himself, yet can forbear judging and censuring those that do They that can erect a Judicature for those who differ from them, and arraign them of Superstition or Formality, shall sooner convict themselves of Pride and Pragmaticality, than give proof of true tenderness of Conscience.  Separat. 
But why did not some amongst us comply sooner? the doing of it at this juncture, gives a very great suspicion that it is not Conscience, but Carnal Interest, to save their Stake.  comform. 
You ought to judge charitably of others, as you would have them to judge so of you; else your Noncompliance may by the same Rule be called Humour, Obstinacy, Schism, Sedition, and such like: But however that may sometimes be made a mans Duty, which was not so always; to go to the public of choice, is one thing, and to do it as a Duty put upon us by Gods 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, changes our Duty; No more than it was to St. Paul, who to the Jews became a Jew, and Circumcised Timothy. We know very well that, vexatio dat intellectum, Penalty and Prosecution put men upon reading Discoursing, and considering those things better, which it may be formerly they never examined: and upon great inquiry, they come to examine whether the things they intended for or against, were of such moment as they thought they had been. It's an Argument of great integrity for a man to change his mind upon clear and rational Conviction: See Mr. How's Excellent sermon in the Morning Lectures against uncharitable Censoriousness; and Mr. Caryl on Job, on that Text, Why persecutest thou me, seeing the root of the matter is in me? O how unseemly is it for such who pled for a public Toleration, to deny a personal one, and for those who condemn Excommunication, yet Excommunicate their own Members for small matters. Dr. Manton in his Sermons on the 119th Psalm, severely condemns that Antichristian Spirit gotten among Protestants, of unchurching and unchristianizing one another for small Differences, imposing, censuring, and rending into Factions, and endeavouring to destroy all, to promote the Interest of one Party to the Prejudice of the whole: These things are contrary to the temper of a true catholic Christian, and are a Sign of a Schismatical Separatist wherever they are found; for who is the true catholic, but he that can hold Communion with any true Church of Christ? and who is the real schismatic, but he that will hold Communion with no Church but his own? See Mr. Gurnal's Christian armor.  Sep. 
I confess, for those men who always thought it their Duty to hold Communion with the Conformists, I do not so much blame them; but to turn upon a sudden, is strange. Why did men formerly go to Meetings, if they do not do it still?  comform. 
I think it looks much worse for a man to persevere in an error, merely because he once maintained it. They are without doubt the best of men that writ Retractations, when once they come to see their mistakes, and fairly confess them to God and Man. But besides, you must distinguish between a time when the supreme Magistrate gives Indulgence, and when he denies it.  Separat. 
I cannot but wonder to hear you pled for unscriptural Terms of Communion, as particularly Forms of Prayer, which stint the Spirit.  comform. 
How do you prove Forms of Prayer stint the Spirit, and that therefore it must be unlawful to join with them? remember that I am not pleading for the imposing of them, but for the using of them: And I have made this Observation; That the Flower of our English Divines have judged Forms of Prayer lawful, when they wrote in could blood; and it matters not much what men say in their hot sits. D. Preston's judgement may be seen in this matter, in his Treatise of Prayer, and in his Sermon before King James: Mr. Capel did approve of them, as may be seen in his Life, written by Mr. Marshal. Dr. Ames also in his Cases of Conscience, speaks favourably of them; Mr. Dod on the Commandements, Mr. Hildersham on John: Mr. Rogers in his seven Treatises persuades people to come to Church at the beginning of the Common Prayer; and not the Husband when it's half done, and the Wise at the end of the Service. See the Ministers of Old England to those of New, written by Mr. Ash and others; wherein they aclowledge the Common Prayer to be a holy and acceptable Service to God, and Edifying to well-disposed people.  Separat. 
I am sure many great Divines have written in defence of Separation.  comform. 
I am sure more great Divines have written against it: See Mr. Perkins in his Exposition of the Epistle of St. judas, telling the World, that no man can with a good Conscience separate from the Church of England, seeing it teacheth, believes and obeyeth the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostles; Mr. Brightman also on the Revelations, exceedingly condemns Separation from the public Churches: See also Mr. Edgerton's Practical Christianity, Pag. 691. Edit. 5. Mr. Bradshaw also in his Unreasonableness of Separation; Mr. Nichols also in his Plea for Puritans, Mr. Rathband in his grave Admonitions: See Mr. Brinsly's Arraignment of Schism, Mr. Wood against Lockyer, Mr. Paget's Arrow against separation, Mr. Caudray against Dr. own, Mr. Knewstabs in the Epistle before his Sermons, Mr. Greenham in his Life; red also the Story of Mr. Penry, who was executed in Queen Elizabeth's time,  told by Mr. Cotton against Williams, page. 117. which would make a Separatists Heart ache: See Mr. Fox his Letter about Separation in Fuller's Church History, Lib. 9. pag. 106. And Mr. Brown the Father of the Brownists, who Conformed at last, as you will find in Fuller: red also old Mr. Parker, in his Book called the Profane Schism of the Brownist, Chap. 12. who applies our Saviours words to them, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do: red also Mr. Hildershams Letter to a Gentlewoman in Prison, about Communion with the Church of England; See Mr. Ball's Trial of separation, Mr. Dyke on the 124th Psalm, and when you have perused the Scriptural Arguments of these men, you will be better satisfied about Lay-Communion.  Separat. 
I confess you have brought abundance of Excellent Mens Authority in the Justification of Forms of Prayer, and against separation upon the Account of the Liturgy; but these were old Non-conformists, and( as I hinted before) the Case is very different now from what it was before the Wars: You'l find it a very difficult matter to name many Non-conformists who now agree with them, because we have more light now.  comform. 
You are much mistaken; I can name many Eminent Non-conformists, who have written against a total Separation from the public Worship of God in the Parochial Assemblies, even since his Majesties Restoration; and therefore the judgement of Moderate Non-conformists are not so much altered, upon the pretence of new Light as you call it. I pray red what Mr. Baxter hath written in the Defence of his Cure of Church Divisions, Mr. Bruning of Ipswich, in his Sermon at the Election of Knights of the Shire, Mr. Sheffield in his Treatise of Excuses. Dr. Collins of Norwich, although he hath writ against the Imposition of Forms of Prayer, yet tells the World, that he thinks it not unlawful to join with them, even at the Holy Sacrament; Mr. Croften also, in his Saints Care for Church Communion, writes against Separation from the Parochial Churches; Dr. Bryan also in his Sermons called Dwelling in God, answers the Separatists Objections against the Common-prayer; Mr. Corbet of Chichester in his Plea for Lay-Communion, doth the like, Mr. Humphry's two Steps, Mr. Read's Case, Mr. Faircloughs Pastors Legacy to his People, Mr. Tomb's his Apology for attending the Parish Worship, Mr. Joseph Allen's Life, and Mr. Richard Allen's farewell Sermon, Mr. Cradacott's farewell Sermen, Mr. Lye's farewell Sermon. Mr. Hickman in his Bonasus Vapulans, tells the World wherever he comes, he persuades people to attend the public way of Worship; and his Conscience would fly in his face, if he should do otherwise: See also Mr. Pool's Vox Clamantis, a latin Book, Mr. Gouge's practise in the Sermon at his Interment, and Mr. Samuel Clark's Life, written by himself.  Separat. 
But surely we ought to join with the Purest Church, and where there are the fewest corrupt Members at the Holy Sacrament; for if any man that is called a Brother, be a railer, or a Persecutor, with such a one we ought not to eat.  comform. 
I grant, we ought to choose the purest Communion we can; but yet we ought not to disturb the peace of the Church, nor to use any unwarrantable Methods, but to observe the Providence of God, and regularly reform what is amiss, according to our place and Station: For as Dr. Manton on judas observes, Corrupt Mixtures are ground of Lamentation, but not of Separation: He that eats and drinks unworthily, eats and drinks damnation to himself, not to me who Receive with him, provided I do my Duty to inform him, and to inform against him, as Mr. Vines on the Sacrament well observes: Mr. Jenkins on judas gives many Reasons to prove that it is Civil eating, and not Religious, that the Apostle there forbids: Shall I refuse to go to the Supper, because there is one there, that hath not on a Wedding Garment, saith Mr. Vines; and the Provincial Assembly of London Ministers did grant, that there were greater Corruptions in the Church of Corinth, than in any of their Congregations; and yet the Apostle no where calls for a separation; and the New-England Ministers attest, in the Platform of Discipline," That as Separation from a Church, where scandalous livers are tolerated, is not presently necessary, so for the worthy Members to abstain from Communion with such a Church, in the participation of Sacraments, is unlawful. So Mr. Burroughs in his Gospel Worship tells us, that we are not defiled by the mere presence of wicked men at the Sacrament,( that's a Deceit and guile that some would put upon them that differ from them) but they are thus far defiled, if they do not their duty to purge them out as far as they have power: red Mr. Jeans on the Sacrament, and Mr. Blake's Vindication; And the five Dissenting Brethren do declare this sincere Profession before God and the World, that all the Conscience of the Defilements in the Church of England, did never work in any of them any thought, but that multitudes of the Parochial Congregations were the true Churches of Christ. And Mr. John Goodwin acknowledgeth, that there was more of the Truth and Power of Religion under the late Prelatical Government, than in all the Reformed Churches in the World besides: See his Sion college Visited; red also what Mr. Henry Jacob hath wrote upon this Subject against a total Separation; and he was looked upon as the Father of the independents: Have a care lest you refuse Communion with Railers while you are such a one yourself.  Separat. 
I much fear some mens Compliance at this time, will put a stop to a Covenant-Reformation.  comform. 
I am of Opinion that nothing more promotes Reformation, than Union amongst all Christians of the Reformed Religion; and nothing more hinders it, than Separation, and Division; take Bishop Usher's word for it, as you may see in his Life; and red Dr. Barrow's Sermons, and Bishop Hall's Peace-maker, and you will be of my mind: I confess I am prove to think, that if our Dissenters would come to Church, and by their presence encourage their Ministers to preach well, and live well, and if he doth not, to acquaint the Bishop, and get him suspended, and a better in his stead; this would more conduce to public Reformation, than running away from them and railing at them: The best way to reform the public, is for every one to endeavour to reform his own Life, and his own Family, and to leave National Reformation to our Governours: red" Dr. Horton's, and Mr. Watson's Sermon before the Parliament, and they will tell you, that the Covenant was not only against Sin in General, but Schism in Particular; and that the very Letter of it was broken. For my part, I think no man can bind himself to that which is not-in his power, and an unlawful Oath is better broken than kept, when made without a legal Authority. A Minor under the Law, if he had made a Vow about any thing, even relating to the Worship of God, it was null and voided, if made without the free consent of the superior. We ought( as one observes) to go to the Scriptures to know what's our Duty in the Worship of God, and not to the Covenant: If the Scriptures make it not a Sin, the Magistrates Command will make it a Duty. We ought to promote Unity; and as the World goeth now, this Communion is the nearest, and needful to express our Unity: It is rather Perjury and Covenant-breaking, either to prefer no public Worship before the Liturgy, or to refuse Communion with the Churches that use it. It is worth observing, that the Divines who framed the Covenant,( and therefore best understood the obligations of it) do in their larger Catechism prefix this Advice: That at Family Worship care ought to be taken, that each Family meet by themselves apart, lest it tend to the prejudice of the public Ministry, and cause Schisms and Separations in the Church: For as Dr. Sibs well observes in his Sermons on the Corinthians, Separation is often a greater fault, than those things for which men pretend to separate, because attended with want of Charity.  Separat. 
I am not so much against Parochial Communion upon the account of different modes of Worship, as upon the account of erroneous Arminian Doctrine taught in the Pulpit: The true Gospel way of Preaching is left off; and the generality of young men preach up mere Morality, and the power of Nature.  comform. 
There are very few men that censure what they hear, who understand those Controversies; and the most wise are of opinion, that those differences are more in words, than in things; and they can with grief of heart hear both Arminians and Calvinists charge one another with such odious consequences which neither of them maintain: Without doubt a Man may be a very good Christian that practiseth the Sermons of one or t'other, because they agree, if not in their Doctrine, yet in their Application, as Mr. Chillingworth well observes: it's 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: I assure you, all the Ministers I hear are agreed in this great Truth delivered by our Saviour; viz. He that believes shall be saved, and he that believes not shall be damned. Doth the Minister you hear own the Merits 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: You'l find some of your own Brethren differ amongst themselves about these Points, of Prescience, Predetermination, Liberty and Necessity. Let me advice you to red the moderate Peace-making reconciling Authors, who endeavour to narrow differences; especially Judge Hale, Bishop Wilkins, Dr. Tillotson, Mr. boil, and Mr. Dent's Plain Man's Path-way to Heaven.  Separat. 
I cannot understand how such who have received a Commission from Jesus Christ to preach the Gospel, with a Woe annexed if they do not, can lay down their Ministry upon the Command of a human Authority.  comform. 
Truly, nor I cannot understand it, neither if they do it voluntarily, and without Compulsion, when they might preach and will not; but that's not the Case; for men are silenced by a legal Authority. Thô it be a Duty to preach the Gospel, yet it's not the Duty of all men, at all times, and in all places, as it was at the first Plantation of Christianity by the Apostles, who had an immediate Call from God, and could work Miracles to confirm their Doctrine: However there are more ways than one to preach the Gospel: Men may go from house to house, and by personal Conferences, and pious Exhortations,( within the bounds of the Law) may edify and promote the Conversion of Souls. red Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs's Advice in his Sermons called Christian Courage in Evil Times, Mr. Joseph Allen's Call to Archippus, Dr. Manton's Case resolved on the 119th. Psalm, pag. 334. The old Non-conformists 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, and old Mr. Parker challenges the World to give an instance of any signs of Pride, or Contempt of Authority: Do we, saith he, persuade any man to refuse the Ceremonies for which we suffer? We stretch our Consciences to the utmost, to comform; we do not willingly cast off our Ministry, but submit to the Providence of God, who calls us from it. See his Book on the across, part. 21. pag. 34: And Mr. Geree in his Vindication of the Church of England, in the Epistle,( though a Non-conformist) saith, That for men to preach publicly against the Command of the Christian Magistrate, without an immediate Call from God, he never thought excusable from Faction. The Magistrate in England doth not forbid preaching in the name of Christ, for they appoint persons to do it, and make Laws to punish Subjects for not hearing. Thanks be to God, we have the Prayers and the Scriptures red in a known Tongue; therefore your Case and the Apostles very much differ. red Bishop Usher's Sermon before King James, on the Unity and Universality of the catholic Church.  Separat. 
Good Sir, Do you think that God will ever make use of a carnal, scandalous Ministry to convert Souls?  comform. 
Because I industriously shun long Disputes, and tedious Answers, I refer you to the Scriptural Reasons of excellent Divines, who assert it as very probable that he doth: As Mr. Pemble in his Discourse of the Nature and Properties of Grace, pag. 125. Mr. Samuel Hiern, in his Preachers Plea, and Mr. Fenner's Sermon called Christ's Alarum to drowsy Saints, and Mr. Anthony Burges's Treatise of Faith and Assurance, pag. 503. and Mr. Swinnock in his Christian Calling, pag. 155. First Part.  Separat. 
All this while you omit the most considerable thing, to justify Communion with the Parochial Assemblies: You should prove them to have the matter and form of true Gospel Churches.  comform. 
That I could easily do. First. As for the the Matter of our Parish Churches, they are a Company of visible Professors of Saving Faith in Christ, with their Children, by the Baptismal Covenant separated for God, and dedicated to him, and do take the name of Saints, as the Primitive Churches did. Secondly, And as for the Form, 'tis their congregating together in a stated course to worship God in Christ, the only mediator between God and Man, to call upon his Name, to hear his Word, to partake of his Sacraments, which was the Form, and the only essential Form of the particular Church of Corinth, Ephesus, Philippi, and the rest; so that our Parish Churches, and the Primitive Churches planted by the Apostles, are for matter and form exactly the same; and those who conceive the matter of a Church to be real Saints, have mistaken the true sense and meaning of Scripture, and upon the false interpretation thereof have built their new Notions. See Mr. Hudson's Essence and Unity of the catholic Church, Mr. Geree's Ten Cases resolved, Mr. Herl's Independency on Scripture, of the Independent Churches.  Separat. 
You seem so much for Parochial Communion, that you make me suspect that you are for a total Separation from the Non-conformists in their Meetings.  comform. 
You mistake, for I am for catholic Communion. I think it Schismatical to separate from any good Christians, where the Providence of God gives me an opportunity to hold Communion, provided the Numbers are such as give no just offence to my lawful Superiors, well knowing, that the Law hath left men within the compass of the Promise; viz. Where two or three are met together in Christ's name, he is in the midst of them. I am not against occasional Communion with any Christians who observe such Rules of Prudence as transgress not the Laws of the Land.  Separat. 
To make Laws about the Worship of God, and appoint what he hath not commanded, I am afraid it looks like an usurpation upon the kingly Office of Jesus Christ, who above all things ought to have the pre-eminence in teaching spiritual Duties.  comform. 
I grant, to impose any Ceremonies, to teach spiritual Duties without a licence from Christ himself, is to trespass upon his Kingly and Prophetical Office; but I know no Ceremonies appointed to be used to that end, and therefore the Argument is grounded upon a false Supposition. The Church, I confess, hath appointed such Ceremonies as she conceiveth apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his Duty by some special Signification; but she hath no where said, that she enjoins them to teach spiritual Duties; she hath enjoined her Ministers to wear a Surplice when they officiate, but hath not said, that she enjoins it to teach them innocence or purity: She enjoins people to kneel at the Sacrament; and she tells us, that we should signify thereby our humble and grateful acknowledgements of the Benefits of Christ, but she doth not say that she designs thereby to teach us Humility and Gratitude for those benefits, but only calls upon us to express that Humility and Gratitude which she supposeth us to have already. And I pray, once again take notice, that I am not pleading for the Imposition of any Ceremonies, but only arguing how far it may be our Duty to submit to them when imposed, rather than disobey lawful Authority, disturb the public Peace, and ruin our Families; thereby rendering ourselves worse than Infidels: But it can be no encroachment on the Offices of Christ, to make use of such things, as are only apt to stir up our minds by way of remembrance of our known prescribed Duty: If this be unlawful, it's unlawful to toll a Bell to put us in mind of going to Prayers, or to keep by us a Death's Head to put us in mind of our Mortality: Is it a derogation from the kingly. Office of Christ to require men to come gravely into the House of God, with their Heads uncovered, and to kneel at Prayer, because those things are apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of the Majesty and Greatness of God: Christ hath not in Scripture set down all those things that may give occasion to good Affections, and pious Meditations. You know the Story of the Cook, who from the consideration of the heat of his own fire, was moved to reflect on the torments of Hell fire, and thereby to abstain from that which would expose him to it: See Mr. Tombs his Theodaliae, who proves Lay-Communion with the Liturgy no derogation to the kingly Office of Christ.  Separat. 
But don't you know that under the Law, there was nothing appointed in the Worship of God, but was fully set down, even unto the Pins of the Tabernacle; and nothing might be done by Moses nor Solomon, about the Tabernacle, or the Temple, though they were two of the wifest men that ever lived; but it must be according to the Pattern which God had given in writing: Since therefore Christ was faithful in all his house,( as Moses was) he hath also given us a Pattern, viz. the holy Scriptures.  comform. 
This Argument holds as strong against the Statute-Book, as the Liturgy, and if the Argument here holds from the Fidelity of Moses, to that of Christ, we ought to have had a Form of Civil Government, as well as of Sacred; or else Christ must be thought less faithful; for he faith of the Judicial Law, as well as of that relating to the Worship of God, You shall observe to do as the Lord hath commanded you, and shall not turn unto the right hand, or to the left: And indeed Arguments taken from Similitudes may conclude things false; for there was a High-priest, therefore there must be an Universal Bishop over all Christians, if your Argument hold good; and you know who will thank you for that.  Separat. 
If you could give out any Instances of such things appointed by the Rulers of the Jewish Church, in sacred things, besides what Moses ordained by divine Command, you would say something.  comform. 
Dear Friend, I could mention several Particulars for which they had no Precept to direct them, but the use of Reason, and prudential Discourse, for directing the practise both of Priest and People: But because our time is short, I shall only refer you to red Dr. Lightfoot's Temple Service: As for Instance; the High-priest was to confess over the Scape-Goat all the Iniquities of the Children of Israel; but we find not in the Law of Moses any Form of words that the Priest was to use; therefore the Elders of the Church appointed him to say, Ah, Lord! Thy people, the House of Israel, have sinned; we beseech thee, O Lord, expiate the Sins, Perversities and Transgressions of thy people. And see many more particulars in the Doctors Book.  Separat. 
But can you produce any Circumstances relating to the Worship of God, which Christ hath left undetermined, and referred to human Prudence under the Gospel.  comform. 
Yes, many: As for instance; Christ hath commanded us to assemble for his solemn Worship, but he hath said nothing of the time and place where and when he would have us assemble, or of the Ornaments of the place, or of the disposal of the Seats, or whether we should sit or stand, whilst hearing, or with what number we should meet, or how long we should be together, whether use a set Form, or pray ex-tempore, whether the Minster alone, or the people join their voices with him; nor in reading hath he  told us what Book, what Chapter, what Part should be red, nor what Translation, nor whether the Minister should preach by Doctrine, Reason and Use, or without, nor what Subject he should choose, nor whether with Notes, or from his memory; nor hath he  told us how often we should receive the Sacrament, nor whether the Bread should be all of Wheat, or of some other Grain, or the Wine Sack, Claret or Muscadine. Innumerable other Instances I could give of things left by Jesus Christ to be determined by human Prudence.  Separat. 
Now under the Gospel God will not accept any thing of the Creatures devising in his Service, but will now be worshipped in Spirit and in Truth.  comform. 
This Notion of yours, I am persuaded, is a mere human Invention; and the common people run away with a great mistake, when they hear or red the Sermons of some against unnecessary Imposition, and thence infer, that they must not join with such a mode of Worship, as hath some things in it that are faulty and defective; especially, when the Providence of God doth not permit them to enjoy such as they call Purer Ordinances: Moreover, Worshipping God in Spirit and in Truth is opposed to Formality, not to Forms of Prayer; for a Christian may pray in the Spirit, and use a Form too. A Man may worship God with his Heart, and yet with his voice, and upon his knees, and with his head uncovered. I pray, red Mr. Byfield on Peter, Submit to every Ordinance of Man for the Lord's sake.  Separat. 
Good Neighbour, doth not your Submission to the Impositions of man, bereave you of your Christian Liberty? And we are bidden to stand fast in the Liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and not to be again entangled with the Yoke of Bondage.  comform. 
Is it not very absurd( think you) to suppose, that our Lord should purchase for his Church a liberty to disobey superiors; especially, when our Obedience to them visibly promotes Love, Peace, Unity, Humility and holy. Order; and our Disobedience promotes, Schisms, dissensions, Uncharitableness, Calumnies, Wrath, Strife, Contentions, and exposeth Families to ruin. The Magistrates Command cannot violate our Christian Liberty, so long as it's only in things of an indifferent nature, because the Conscience is obliged by them: At this rate the Commands of Masters and Parents must violate Christian Liberty: If we refuse to submit to things indifferent, because commanded; 'tis but forbidding us to yield Obedience to them, and then, by your own Principles, we must be exact Conformists. Christian Liberty cannot be violated by requiring Persons to do that of which their Conscience( being erroneous) doubts; for, if it were, then our Laws violate Christian Liberty, when they command the Quaker to pay tithes, and the Papist to take the Oath of Supremacy. See Mr. Downham's Christian Liberty, and Mr. Botton's True Bounds of Christian freedom, and Mr. Galespy's Wholesome Severity reconciled to Christian Liberty.  Separat. 
For my part I dare not join with the Parochial Assembies in their Ceremonies, lest I should encourage Superiors in their imposing burdens upon others; and harden them in that which I take to be their Sin; and so should be a partaker in Guilt. I think it my Duty rather to bear my Testimony against these things.  comform. 
This Opinion will led to Faction in the State, as well as to Schism in the Church; and we may as well quarrel with many Acts of Parliament, which may in time become burdensome; and if this Opinion be true, then must our Lord and his Apostles become guilty of the like Sin; for they did ordinarily join with the Jews in their public Service; notwithstanding they who sate in Moses's Chair, imposed more Ceremonies than are imposed in our Church: We only become guilty of the Sins of others directly, by actually consenting unto, willing or approving of the Sin of others, or by commanding the doing of it, or by persuading, encouraging, or alluring others to Sin: Or Indirectly, when we do that which is a culpable occasion of Sin: But here is no occasion justly given, though it may be unjustly taken. We find in Scripture, it was required that they should lie down in their Idol Temples to worship, and yet the Jews( though God no where commanded them to do so) did at the eating of their Passover lie down, in token of the Rest that God had given them in the good Land; and we find, that Christ and his Apostles did comform themselves to this Custom, without thinking themselves guilty of the Sin of those who first required this Idolatrous Custom. What if Independency were too rigorously imposed? must we forbear it, or justify the Law?  Separat. 
I must deal freely with you, and declare, that one great Objection that I have against Parochial Communion, is, That it minister Scandal to our weaker Brethren; and you know what the Apostle saith in that case.  comform. 
I cannot tell how the People in the City have been taught; but I think, if any of them are so weak, as to be scandalised at their Fellow Citizens Communion with the public Assemblies, they ought to be better instructed; for, Scandal( properly considered) is an action whereby occasion is ministered to the Sin, Fall, and ruin of our weak Brother, by laying a Stumbling-block in his way: But that Sin and Fall of others which is occasioned by my doing of my Duty, cannot be my Sin: So the Preaching of the across was to the Jews a Stumbling-block, and the Gospel preached was to some a Savour of Death. By Obedience to the lawful Commands of my superiors, I cannot be guilty of sinful scandalising of my Brother, because Obedience is my Duty. The Scandal caused by one that refuseth Communion, when he may lawfully obey, is Scandalum datum, because it ariseth from the Omission of a Duty; but the Scandal administered by the Communicant, can be only Scandalum acceptum, or Scandal arising not from the Action of him that holds Communion, but from the Ignorance and Weakness of him that is offended at his so doing; for I give my weak Brother no just occasion to be grieved at what I do, or to pass Censure upon me as an Evil-doer, or to separate from Communion with me, or to do with a doub●ing Conscience what he seeth me do: But, by omission of my Duty to superiors in lawful things, I give just occasion to all who piously and peaceably comform, to grieve at my Action, and to pass their Censures on me, as one turbulent, schismatical, and disobedient to higher Powers: And if I do( by my example) occasion the Omission of my Brother's Du●y, and his Separation, I shall be justly charged with his guilt, as ministering Temptation to him by that Example, to neglect what he ought to do; and so I must offend him truly( in the Apostles ●ense) by tempting him to Sin. As I 〈◇〉 not effend my Brother, so I must not offend my Gover●our, who is my ●rother also. red Dr. Sanderson, Bishop Usher, Bishop Reynolds, and other excellent Divines who have written upon this Argument, and it will plainly appear, that he that refuseth to comform to Lay-Communion, lest he should offend his weak Brother, seems directly to sin himself, to avoid an occasion of Sin in another; and so offends God, the King, the Church, the Laws and Conscience too, by not doing his Duty, lest he should offend his Brother by doing it: And therefore I cannot but commend the practise of such Non-conforming Ministers who go unto the Parish-Churches, if it be but to convince the people,( by their practise) that they do not think it a Sin so to do.  Separat. 
But when you once begin to comply, do you know where you shall end? Therefore it's best not to yield in the least, but to shun the beginnings of Sin.  comform. 
When you once begin to separate from the public Worship, do you know where you shall end? whether in Athei●m or Quakerism, as multitudes have done, who have thrown off all Ordinances upon the pretence of purer Administrations? We are to examine whether the Commands of our Superiors are at present lawful, not whether they may be so hereafter: Will you like it, if your Child should refuse to obey your lawful Commands; for fear you should live to command something that's unlawful? This Argument would cancel the Obligation of all Laws. Let us do our present Duty, and trust God with future events; and when we are called to suffer rather than sin, we may then suffer comfortably: For( as Mr. Jeremiah Burroughs well observes) it hath been a very dividing Principle, that some Men have taken up, viz. Not to go as far as they could, because they could not go as far as they would. Indeed it's good to shun the Beginnings of Sin, but it's not good to call that Sin which God never called so.  Separat. 
Pu● by your Complicance, you occasion the Sufferings of many conscientious Christians, who cannot do as you do; and so you encourage Persecutors.  comform. 
Its a gross mistake, to think that our Communion justifieth the penal Severities of the Laws on others: What if it were death for a man to have his Hat on at the public Prayers? doth it justify the rigour of the Law, for a man to pull off his Hat? Must I forbear that which my Conscience calls my Duty, if an other suffer for counting it a Sin? have not Mr. Tombs and Mr. nigh writ in defence of the Oath of Supremacy, though many have suffered for refusing it. Must not I obey the Laws, because others suffer for disobeying them? Mr. Strong in his Sermons called Two Sticks made One, tells us, That the way to Peace and Unity, is, for men to comply as far as they can, even against their own Rights; and Mr. Cotton on Cant. saith, That it's no Infringement of Christian Liberty to submit to Christian Laws. I remember, one of my Neighbours neglected to baptize his Child, who, when I blamed him for not bringing his Child to Church for that end,  told me, one of his Brothers discouraged him, who had never brought any of his Children, because it would be a means to cause his suffering for the Omission: But this was a very weak Argument for the former to neglect his Duty.  Separat. 
This sinful Compliance weakens the Protestant Interest.  comform. 
Sinful Compliance I condemn as much as you do; and I am sure that sinful Separation strengtheners the Roman Interest; and I am confident, that Union amongst those who profess the Reformed Religion, is the best Bulwark against Popery: See Bishop Usher's Life, and an excellent Discourse, called, The Necessity of maintaining the present established Religion in opposition to Popery. See Dr. Bates's his Farew●ll Sermon, and he will tell you, That separation and Division gives a nighty advantage to Popery; Mr. Wood an eminent Presbyterian, in his Answer to Lockyer, tells him, That the Separating Principle is like to prove a Disgrace to the Reformation, and will open a Door to Popery. red also Mr. Gataker against Can, and Mr. Whitaker's Sermon before the Parliament.  Separat. 
But by going to the public we do, as it were, aclowledge ourselves to have been in an error formerly, when we went to private Meetings.  comform. 
I confess, I have often thought that the reason why many would not come at the Parish Churches, was, either from Ignorance, melancholy or shane, which are the three grand Causes of Scrupulosity: But, I pray, why should any man be ashamed to change his practise, if he once comes to see, his error and mistake. Let me ask you one Question: Did you ever imagine before, that so many Learned, Wise and Good Men were against a total Separation from the Parish Churches? Have not the best men that ever were changed their practices, when they have been convinced of their errors and Mistakes? Have we not the Example of the Prophets and Apostles for it, and of the ancient Fathers of the Church for it? I could give multitudes of Examples of young persons, who have wrote and disputed vehemently for Separation, but in their more experienced age confess their error: They come nearest the Inspired Writers, who have the humility to confess their Mistakes.  Separat. 
For my part, I am for keeping to the Rule of Scripture; and as the Conformists justify their Separation from the Church of Rome, even by the same Arguments may the Non-conformists justify their Separation from the Church of England, there being abundance of things required not contained in our only Rule of Faith, the Bible.  comform. 
Let me tell you, this is a very fallacious way of arguing, to confounded Articles of Faith with Circumstances of Worship; used by some Jesuitical Writers, who go under the name of Protestants, as Heath did formerly, as you may red in the Book called Foxes and Fircbrands, and in other later Pamphlets: But as a full Answer to such impertinent Writings; I pray red a late Treatise called The difference of the Case between Separation from the Church of Rome, and Separation from the Church of England.  Separat. 
Your saying that indifferent things in the Worship of God, no where forbidden, are lawful, is but the same thing with the Romanists talking of Negative Articles of Faith, and demanding where it is forbidden to pray to Saints departed, &c.  comform. 
The Case( as I said before) is vastly different; for we are required expressly to pray to God alone in the name of Christ; and will you parallel the Object of Prayer with a Vesture, a Gesture, and a Mode of Expression, things neither commanded nor forbidden. red the Second Part of the Protestant Reconciler, and also the Protestant Peace-maker, written by the present Learned Bishop of Cork.  Separat. 
As I hinted before, I wonder to find you name so many Authors, when( I assure you) I don't intend to pin my Faith upon mens Sleeves, but upon the Word of God.  comform. 
The reason why I refer you to these excellent Authors, is, because I would have you see that I am not singular in my judgement and practise; and moreover, because I study brevity in this Discourse, and refer you to further enquiry at your leisure; and I must tell you, I am no more for pinning my Faith upon human Authority, than you are, and no further than these excellent Men expound Scriptures according to the Analogy of Faith, do I respect them; neither do they desire that we should be Followers of them any further than they are of Christ. Let me ask you, do you think yourself wise enough to understand the Scriptures without a Guide? All the Differences among Christians may be reduced to one Original, viz. about the sense and meaning of the Scriptures: And now it's a great satisfaction to every wise and good man, to see the Expositions of Learned and Pious Divines, that so he may not be imposed upon by cunning and crafty men, who lay wait to deceive, by false gloss and wrested Interpretations of Scripture; and strange it is, that you who cry out against human Authority when they are against your Opinions, shall nevertheless consult at the same time with some private Friend, or Chap-man whose Opinion you esteem, though it may be of very weak judgement; and this person( like the Pope) must be thought as if he were infallible, when a hundred men of better understandings must be rejected, because they contradict your Sentiments: Thus men betray egregious Folly and sinful Partiality: And let a man of great Piety, profound Reason, and long Experience, writ a Book against your Principles and Practices, he shall be charged with Imprudence and Inconsideration by some weak narrow-soul'd Persons; and this shall be a sufficient Answer to all his Arguments. Thus men by Partiality set bars to Truth, and perpetuate error, and resolve to remain blind by shutting out the light; and whilst they condemn an implicit Faith, exercise nothing else.  Separat. 
I cannot understand this temporising humour now grown so much in fashion, merely to prevent Suffering.  comform. 
Nor I cannot understand how some men can suffer Christianly, and comfortably for refusing to join in the public Worship of God in the Parish Churches, seeing lawful Authority requires it, and a higher Authority no where forbids it.  Separat. 
Do you think a Christian cannot have peace in suffering, who refuseth to do a lawful Action, whilst the thing appears to him to be unlawful.  comform. 
I do not deny but he may, through the invincible prejudices of Education, and for want of better information, and( it may be) through want of judgement to discern the Arguments brought against his Opinion, or perhaps want of leisure to red and converse with intelligent persons who would undeceive him.  Separat. 
I hope you would not have weak Christians red such Formal Books as pled for carnal Compliance; this is the way for men to be led into dangerous Temptations.  comform. 
Those are not dangerous Books that teach men their Duty to God and the King. I am of Opinion nothing hath contributed more towards our present Divisions in matters of Religion, than that those who are once proselyted to a Party, account no Book safe, or worth the reading, than those of their own Teachers, unless it be on those common Truths that touch not the matter in difference; many amongst us being like some in the Lord Bacon's time, who( as he observes of them) thought it a tempting of God to red a Book contrary to their private Opinions. Old Mr. Dod( I confess) used to advice his Hearers not to red the Brownist's Books for fear of being infected by them, and so doth Mr. Capel in order to the avoiding Temptations, as you may see in his Book on that Subject.  Separat. 
I am sure our Saviour pronounceth them Blessed that suffer for Righteousness sake; and tells them, that theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.  comform. 
You say very true; but it's not the Punishment, but the Cause that makes the Martyr. Mr. Baxter in his Book called Obedient Patience, tells us, that there are many who now suffer in a Cause that's neither good nor justifiable, for refusing Parochial Communion: Good Brother, let us lay our Hands upon our Hearts, and put this Question to ourselves; Whether turning our backs upon public Worship, when we can have it no otherwise, will bear us out with comfort in suffering? Let us have a care lest we pull down trouble upon our own Heads: I am afraid suffering for refusing to comply with the external Circumstances of our Religion, cannot be called a Persecution for Righteousness sake: Then I suffer as a Christian, when the Honour of Christ, or something that offers violence to my Religion and Christianity itself is concerned in it, when I suffer for that which I cannot avoid without disowning myself to be a Christian, and making shipwreck of Faith, and a good Conscience: But where the Case is not evidently thus, a man may draw miseries upon himself, and yet not suffer as a Christian, because it may proceed from Humour or Interest. Men very often place Religion in doing or not doing what is no part of it; and then they think they may safely suffer upon that account. Doth that man suffer for Religion, who suffers for refusing to do that which our Blessed Saviour and his Disciples did; viz. hold Communion with public Worship, notwithstanding some Corruptions in the circumstantial mode of Administration. The Church of Galatia was turned aside to another Gospel, and held Justification by Works, and some in the Church of Corinth denied the Article of the Resurrection, and yet Saint Paul no where calls for a Separation. Sure I am, the Primitive Christians would never have passed through the fiery Trial, nor the Holy Martyrs in Queen Maries dayes have forfeited their Lives and Estates, had no more been required of them, than there is of us: viz. To come to Church, or to kneel at the Sacrament; but would rather have blessed God, and thankfully have owned the favour of their Governours. For Subjects obstinately to stand out about such small matters, it makes them Martyrs to their own humors, rather than to the Cause of Christ, as Mr. Bernard well observes in his Counsels of Peace: If men suffer for known Truths, or against known Error and Wickedness, they are safe; for which they have the Examples of Gods Word, and of holy Martyrs; but beware( saith he) of suffering for things unknown to all former ages, though they seem never so just. And as the Father observes, it's every whit as glorious to suffer the Flames of Martyrdom, and to die for not dividing the Church by causeless Separations, as it is to be burnt for refusing to Sacrifice to Idols. To be persecuted for Righteousness sake, signifieth, to be persecuued for Obedience unto God; But when men are prosecuted for disobedience to lawful Authority,( supposing they are convinced the thing required is lawful) they suffer not for God's sake, but for their own, and not as Martyrs, but as Malefactors: This made St. Peter distinguish so carefully between suffering as an Evil-doer, and as a Christian; Chap. 2. ver. 13. Now to suffer as a Christian, is to suffer for the Christian Religion, or for any fundamental Truth of it, as the Prophets and Apostles did of old; who in all their Sufferings were reduced to this sad necessity of disobeying God, or the Civil Authority. red Bishop Bilsons Discourse of Christian Subjection.  Separat. 
But do you think a man cannot suffer as a Christian for refusing to submit to the Ceremonies of the Church.  comform. 
In case of necessity, that a man must not worship God publicly at all, unless he submit to the use of such Ceremonies which perhaps he thinks inconvenient, but cannot prove them absolutely unlawful: In this case a man may sin in suffering, because at the same time he suffers for neglecting the public Worship of God, which he cannot enjoy without the Ceremonies. But,( as I said before) if a man hath used the best means he could to inform his Understanding, and yet is fully persuaded it is sinful to use the Ceremonies, he will suffer the more comfortably, and deserves to be the more pitied.  Separat. 
I could not take the Sacrament at the Rale, for I scruple coming up to the Altar: I am for doing nothing more than the Law requires.  comform. 
I do not place Holiness in one part of the Church more than in another; but yet, it being more convenient for the Minister to give it at that place, and because I would not be singular, when the Generality of the People accustom themselves so to do, I see no Superstition in it; especially if the Minister desires me to come up to the Table, thereby to prevent some mens jealousy, lest he should dispense with the kneeling Gesture in a private Pew, and thereby render himself obnoxious to the Canon of Suspension. And if some men choose rather to call the Communion Table an Altar, that shall not affright me away from it: What matter is it to a wise Man which way the Communion Table stands? Suppose he that placed it so, had a Superstitious Intention, that doth not make me criminal. If this be all you scruple, I suppose your Minister will gratify you, and give it in your Pew, the Law not forbidding it. But you and I know, that the Ancients used the word Altar with great Innocency, only as a figurative Expression, and no more understood by it: If the Rales be only intended to secure it from indecent usage, and to express Reverence and Respect to the Sacrament, as we are  told they are, I know no hurt in them; nor will I refuse the Sacrament upon that account, so long as the Scripture no where forbids it, and Custom, in some Churches, obligeth men to come up to that place. And whereas you say, you'l do nothing but what the Law requires; I wonder why you keep your Hat off in the Church, for there's no Law for it: There was no Law to compel our Saviour to contribute to the Temple, he did it to avoid offence.  Separat. 
I cannot go to those Churches where there are Organs; it seems to me to be a Popish foolish way of Praising, and a mere Device.  comform. 
I am not fond of them, yet I think it not lawful to separate from public Worship upon that account, seeing Instrumental music was used in the Jewish Church, and directed by David and Solomon; and it is also used in the Lutheran, and in many of the Reformed Churches as well as in ours, and many Pious Men profess their Spirits much raised and elevated by it in singing the Praises of the great God; therefore I would not impose upon them, or hinder their Elevation of Soul. See Mr. Baxter's Opinion of Organs, who saith, a man may as lawfully use them, as drink a Glass of Wine to raise his Spirits when dull; red also Bishop Hall's Meditations, Dr. Moor also, and the Excellent Bishop of Cork upon the same Subject.  Separat. 
The Non-conformist Ministers will not go to Church, very few of them at least; and they must starve for want of maintenance, if all the people should forsake them, as you do.  comform. 
The Case of us Lay-men, and of Non-conforming Ministers,( as I  told you) is vastly different; their practise cannot be a Rule to us; they dare not appear in the Church, in a Corporation, for fear of being sent to Prison, according to the Five-mile Act; therefore do not look for them there: But though many of them do not come to Church, yet the Moderate ones amongst them do; especially in the country Villages, where they dare appear in public: And whereas you say, they must starve, if not heard; I hope some of them can live without your maintenance: And for those amongst them that are Poor and Indigent, you may contribute your Charity towards their Relief, without breaking the Laws to hear them Preach in great numbers, when you may hear them in private Families.  Separat. 
We ought to hold Communion where there is the best Discipline.  comform. 
You say true, when you can have it in a lawful way; viz. by Prayers to God, humble Addresses to Authority, faithful Performance of Duty both to Ministers and Church Members: But men must have a care lest they act so irregularly, as to deserve Church-censure and Discipline themselves, for taking a bad course to come at Church-discipline upon others: Men must not do evil, that good may come; this is to cure the Church by cutting her Throat. Austin, Ca●vin, Cyprian, and the most and best Divines, are against Separation merely for defective Discipline: But yet, let me tell you, the Parish-Churches are not without Discipline, for the Title Rector( which the Law gives to all Parsons) implieth it: And in the rubric the Minister is not only authorised, but commanded to keep all Scandalous Persons from the Sacrament; and the same Order is given in the Canon. Besides, every Parish hath Wardens under Oath, to present all Scanlous Persons in order to Punishment: Shall you and I neglect our Duty, in holding Communion with the public Congregations, because other me● neglect theirs? At that rate we must hold Communion with no Church. I wish, that you, and others of our dissenting Brethren that complain, are not accessary to the want of Discipline, by withdrawing your Brotherly Assistance, for Discipline must begin at the People. The way to cure the Church, saith old Mr. Calamy in his Sermon at aldermanburic, is not to separate from them, but to continue with them; and by dwelling amongst them, to labour to enrich and heal them. We must not hurt a Community for private Convenience. Separation shows a great want of Charity, and consequently of a true catholic Spirit: It's below the Spirit of a generous Christian to look at his own things; for he desires not to please himself, but all men for their Edification.  Separat. 
That's the very thing that makes me separate: I find I cannot edify by our own Parish Preacher, he is so dull, and reads all his Sermon.  Separat. 
Perhaps the fault may be more in the Hearer than in the Preacher: Did you not come with prejudice against the Minister? Perhaps you are dull and heavy yourself, and slept away the greatest part of the Sermon, or, it may be, your thoughts were taken up with Secular Affairs. There are thousands of Glorified Saints in Heaven, and of Gracious Souls on Earth, that have found Edification in the Parish Churches of England. I could tell you of an Eminent Divine, viz. Mr. Geree, who hath  told the World in Print, that amongst all the Spiritual Converts that are in our Church, not one in a thousand hath been converted by a Separatist, but before ever they went into the way of Separation: And if using Notes hinder Edification, you must not hear the best and the ablest of your own Teachers, who do the same thing: At this rate the Ministers must get the Chapters by heart, and not red them neither, lest it hinder your Edification; do but shut your eyes, and then you may be edified.  Separat. 
I don't understand why we should be refused the choice of our own Pastors for our Souls, any more than of our Physicians for our bodies.  comform. 
Whether the People have a Right to choose their own Pastors, you and I will not now determine; neither is it proper to our particular Case: The Question is, Whether if you are not permitted to choose your own Pastors, you may therefore turn your back upon his Ministry, and grieve and discourage him by your absence, and thereby show an ill Example to others to do the same, when it may be he is a tolerable good Preacher, and a very good Man? If the Doctrine preached in the poorest Parish-Church in England, be but humbly heard and embraced( though by a weak Minister) there can be no danger of Salvation, because it's the Doctrine of Christ, and the same for Substance which the Brethren preach in private. Be sure to add to your Ministers Labours hearty Prayers for a Blessing, and godly Conferences, and Watchfulness over your Hearts and Lives, and mourn for those Sins which have deprived you of such Pastors as you desired to choose; but do not forsake the Assembling of yourselves together in the public Worship of God, which is much to be preferred before the Private Assemblies. red Mr. Charnock upon the Divine Attributes, pag. 140. What if you did not choose your Minister at first? yet if you consented to him afterwards, and have received benefit by his Ministry, or might have done, had it not been your fault; this is no just Plea for Separation: The London Presbyterians gave good reason why in some Cases People are not to be trusted with the choice of their own Pastors: See their Jus Divini Ministerii. And Dr. Seaman hath particularly answered this Objection in a single Treatise, and so hath Dr. Stillingfleet in his Unreasonableness of Separation.  Separat. 
I cannot join in the Responses at your Prayers; to me it looks like that vain babbling which the Scripture condemns.  comform. 
If we impartially consider the matter, it will not appear so; for by our Saviours Caution against vain Repetitions, it seems there are some Repetitions that are not vain: And this we may suppose, because Christ himself praying in his Agony, thrice used the same Petitions, and that in the same words: That which our Saviour condemns, seems to be that Repetition which proceeds from the affectation of much speaking in Prayer, or from a belief that God will not be moved to help us, unless we use many words, and repeat the same thing over in a tedious manner; but when the matter repeated is weighty and grave, and apt to move Pious Affections, it cannot be liable to the charge of Vanity: Such Petitions as, Lord have Mercy upon us, deserve the putting forth of the whole strength of our Desires and Affections; and when we ascribe Glory to the holy Trinity, we express what we ought to make the end of our Worship, and of all the Actions of our lives. How can such as charge our Service with vain Repetitions, have a Reverend esteem of the 136th Psalm, where for 26 Verses together, His Mercy endureth for ever, is repeated in very verse. If our Devout Affections go along with our vocal Responses, it is a good way to check a wandring Spirit, and help and relieve Attention, and to excite a lively Activity in God's Service, by provoking one another to pray and to give thanks. This was the practise of the Primitive Church, before Popery was known: red Dr. Faulkners Libertas Ecclesiastica, and Mr. Hookers Ecclesiastical policy, and the second part of the Protestant Reconciler.  Separat. 
I cannot join in these things, lest I should encourage people in Superstition by my example.  comform. 
Your refusing to hold Communion with Gods public Worship, encourages people more in superstition than you are ware of; for that's properly Superstition, to scruple and place Religion in forbearing lawful actions, with a touch not, taste not, handle not: let me tell you, that you do ten times more mischief by your Separation, than you think you do: for I would judge charitably, and hope that you do not design mischief; you harden all the Sectaries in their way: You promote Atheism, people's seeing so many new unheard of ways in Religion, think there is no Religion at all, and so neglect all. Again, you are guilty of the sin of Schism, for such a Sin is all causeless separation; you undermine the reputation of your Parish Minister thereby, render his Ministry the less successful; you wrong the Separators by cherishing their causeless scruples, and so become accessary to the weakness of their Consciences, you train them up to a dislike of public Authority, cause them to break the first Commandment; and nourish in them Spiritual pride, in judging better of themselves than they ought. red Mr. Bradshaws Unreasonableness of Separation.  Separat. 
But do you seriously persuade me to go to Church?  comform. 
Not I, but the Law: I'll persuade no man to do what he is not satisfied he may do with a good Conscience; for I have no ambition to make Proselytes; neither am I the better or the worse, for another mans differing from me. I confess in general, I think myself obliged in Conscience, to persuade those with whom I converse, to peaceableness of temper, and to Obedience to Authority; and I hope one good effect of this discourse will be, to help to cure that censorious Spirit that abounds; by letting men see how little cause they have to condemn others, for doing that which they have good reasons for, and such arguments which I fear the Separatists never thought on. If this Conference doth but bring Dissenters to more Charity towards those who do comform to Lay-Communion, it will be a good step towards their doing so too in time themselves.  Separat. 
I do admire how you can submit to the Use of the across in Baptism, which is so plainly a significant Ceremony.  comform. 
I am not Ignorant what tedious Disputes there have been amongst learned men about this Matter, whether it may lawfully be imposed; but this is none of our present controvesie: The Question is between you and I Lay-men, Whether we may lawfully suffer our Children to be so Baptized with it, when we cannot have it done without it: for my part, I do not in the least Question but we may. For consider, this Professing sign was anciently used by the Primitive Christians( before the Corruptions of Popery were ever heard of,) in defiance of all sorts of Infidels, in token that they should not be ashamed of a crucified Saviour: we do in this but follow the examples of the purest and holiest Professors of the Gospel that ever were: The across is not appointed to represent any thing to us, but only to remind us of a Duty which we are bound to do; like that Altar which was built by the Children of Reuben and Gad, not for Burnt offering, nor for Sacrifice, but that it might be a Witness. The Question is not, Whether it be lawful for the Minister to use it; that hath been denied by those very Nonconformists, who do grant that Lay men may offer their Children to be Baptized where it is used, if they cannot have it done without it. Because Baptism is Gods Ordinance, and the Sin( if it be one) is the Ministers and not ours; for another mans sinful mode will not justify the neglect of our Duty. And if every significant custom in a Church must pass for a new Sacrament, then sitting at the Communion is a new Sacrament, because we are  told it betokens Rest and Communion with Christ; and putting off the Hat in Prayer is a professing sign of Reverence; it cannot be thought a Medium in Gods Worship, because our worship is not directed to it, nor do we Kneel before it, nor declare that we are excited by it to worship God. The sign of the across is not an Essential of Baptism, as is manifest by the Canon; which tells us, that the Infant Baptized is by virtue of Baptism, before it be signed with the sign of the across, received into the Congregation of Christs Flock, as a perfect Member thereof; and not by any Power ascribed unto the sign of the across. And it after addeth, that this Church accounteth this sign a lawful outward Ceremony, and honourable Badge, whereby the Infant is dedicated to the service of him that dyed upon the across: now dedicating a Person being an engaging or setting him a part for God, and it being evident from the Canon that this dedicating is wholly distinct from the Baptismal dedication, to be a Member of Christs Church; we must hereby understand the Church to engage this member upon her account to the service of Christ; as when a Father shall warn his Children, to Devote themselves to the service of God, as he himself hath done. And this sense is yet more evident from the Office of Baptism, where the Minister baptizing( acting in the Name of God) saith in the Singular Number, I Baptize, &c. But saith in the Plural number, We receive this Child, and do sign him, &c. acting herein in the Name of the Rulers and other Members of the catholic Church, in Communion with us; the whole body defiring and seeking the good of every member: Moreover it is used after Baptism, and in case of sudden sickness it may be omitted, as you may see in the Liturgy; which plainly proves it is not thought essentially necessary to the Ordinance: When any charge is given to any Person, the common Wisdom of Mankind hath always thought it very expedient, to add to the Solemnity thereof by some fignificant Rite. And this is all that's intended by the sign of the across. See Bishop Morton on this Subject.  Separat. 
But it's good to keep as far off as we can from any thing that hath been abused by Papists.  comform. 
But it is not good to run from Rome into Babel: he that will condemn a piously ordered sign of Admonition and Memorial, because a superstitious, operative use of the same is not allowable, must condemn things greatly different as if they were the same; as if because Gideons Ephod was abused when it was made an Idol, therefore the use of an Ephod by Samuel in the service of God must be thought insufferable; and because the Image of Caesar set up to be worshipped is abominable, therefore his Image stamped upon his coin must not be tolerated: Those mens Bodies which were once abused to the service of sin, may yet find acceptance with God in serving him. The Directory tells us, that Things and Places formerly abused to Superstition, are not presently to be laid aside as unlawful; and the Protestants beyond the Seas, in their Confessions declare, that the true way of Reformation in the Church, is not to root out every thing that was found in the Church of Rome, but to reject what was fit to be rejected, and to preserve what was fit to be preserved: And the Church of England professeth the same, in the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer: It's true, Hezekiah broke down the Brazen Serpent when abused to Idolatry, but we must consider that the Jews had positive Laws to demolish all Idolatrous places, which we Christians have not; and moreover, it was done by lawful Authority, whose regular Reformations we must wait for in the way of our Duty: And be sure to remember, that we are not discoursing what is convenient in case of Liberty, but what is lawful in case of Necessity.  Separat. 
I have so great a prejudice against the Surplice, that I cannot attend the Prayers of one that wears it, it seems to me to be so very indecent.  comform. 
I will not go about to dispute for a white Surplice, but I'll keep to my usual Method of Discourse, and only desire to know of you, whether you think you can justify the lawfulness of neglecting the public Worship of God, because the Minister that officiates doth not wear his Garment of such a Colour as pleaseth your fancy; especially when we consider, that the greatest part of Mankind, both Jews and Christians, have accounted white Garments both honourable and comely; and they are also approved as such by the Wisdom of God himself, in the Description of the most excellent Persons and Things. I pray tell me, how came you to have a better judgement concerning what is decent in the Church, than the rest of the World have, or than he who gave the Being both to the World, and to the Church? Again, If we consider the great Antiquity of this white Garment in the Church, before ever Popery was known: For, fince the degeneracy of the Roman Church, the Surplice is none of their proper Massing Garments, being never worn by the Priest who consecrateth at the Mass; but there are six other Garments which are used by their Priests, and accounted their holy Ga●ments, all of them having their particular Consecrations, as the Surplice hath not; this Garment having been less abused by them than their Churches, and their Communion clothes, which, by reason of their manifest Conveniency and Decency, are by us still thought lawful to be used.  
The use of black Garments may be argued against from the topic of Abuse, with as much plausibleness as can be argued against white: For the ancient Pagan Priests wore a black Garment, and were from thence called Chemarim●, as you may see in Zeph. 1.4. which Junius renders Atratus,( as Buxtorf observes.) At this rate men may dispute themselves out of God's Creation, since Heaven and Earth, and all sorts of Creatures have been Idolatrously abused. Calvin himself dislikes the Heat of Contention against the use of it; and many Protestant Churches use it in Germany, Denmark, Norway, &c. And I could prove, that it was not properly an Aaronical Garment, and therefore not liable to the charge of judaisme; for the High-priest's Ephod was made of Blue, and Purple, and Scarlet; and his rob was all of Blue, which can have no assinity with the Surplice; and if there were any part of their Garments white, it differed very much in the shape or fashion from ours: But if it did not, I am sure good men will rejoice to hear the Gospel preached, although it were in a Fool's Coat.  Separat. 
I am not so much against a Form of Prayer in General, as I am against the Particular Form prescribed; it having so many needless Tautologies, and is yet so defective in many Cases, and such a could, dull, lifeless way of Expression, that I cannot join with it.  comform. 
If it be such a could, empty Form, I pray come and fill it with your warm Devotions; for the fault( I am apt to think) is in the Supplicants, who do not join Faith and Fervency. It's frequently observed, that the same persons that condemn the use of the Common-prayer, condemn also the use of the Lord's Prayer itself, which is a considerable part of the Liturgy. Suppose those excessent men who penned the Prayers of the Church should have lived in our times, and have used those very words memoriter, would we have refused to join with them in Prayer? and if they would have been good from their mouths, why not from the mouths of other men? I should be as●●med to repeat the rude Expressions, and impertinent Ta●tologies of some of your own in their ex-tempore Prayers; will you therefore refuse to hold Communion with them? The ordinary Lord's Day's Service in the Liturgy, is an excellent Form of sound Words, suited to common Capacities, and common Necessities, and from thence takes it's Denomination. The Compilers of it were excellent Men, and some of them Martyrs for the Protestant Reformed Religion: And( as Mr. Ball observes) it was not taken out of the Mass-Book; but composed from the purest Liturgies in the primitive times, before ever the Mass-Book was heard of in the World: The Mass-Book may more properly be said to have borrowed some part of it, as that Learned Author well observes. Good Sir, confisider, what makes up the Liturgy? is it not the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the Commandments, the Psalms of David, the Song of Zecharias, the Virgin Mary and old Simeon; What better Doxologies of Praise for our Redemption by Jesus Christ, according to the ancient use of the Christian Church? What hurt is there in the excellent Hymn of St. Ambrose, and in the Prayer of St. Chrysostome? Are there not also two Chapters red in the holy Bible, one out of the Old Testament, another out of the New, besides Epistles and Gospels proper for the day, together with Comprehensive Collects, and Prayers for the whole State of Christ's Church Militant, and particularly for our Governours, that we may live peaceably and quietly, in all Godliness and Honesty?  Separat. 
I am apt to think you are under a great mistake, in thinking Uniformity the way to Unity. I confess, Mental Communion amongst all the Members of Christ, is to be recommended, viz. in Faith and Love; but Local Communion will no way help to cure Divisions.  comform. 
It is the general Opinion of the wisest Men, and the best Christians, that nothing can more conduce towards Union, than Parochial Communion; for when men are perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgement, all speaking the same thing, and with one mouth glorifying God, and joining their Amen in the public Congregation; this is the best expedient to increase brotherly Love, and to put an end to our unchristian Heats and Animosities, and to create a right Understanding amongst Men. Let some politic Persons pretend what they please, difference in judgement will produce difference in Affection; and therefore if we would leave off quarreling one with another, let us in the House of God frequently pray one with another, and particularly this excellent Prayer of our Church: That God would look down in much Pity and Compassion upon this distressed Church and Nation, whose bleeding Wounds, occasioned by the lamentable Divisions that are amongst us, cry aloud for his speedy Help, and saving Relief; and that be would stir up every Soul of us carefully to become sincere Christians, and root out of our Hearts Pride, Vain-glory, Wrath, Bitterness, all unjust Prejudice, and causeless Jealousies, all Hatred and Malice, and desire of Revenge, and whatsoever it is that may exasperate our Minds, or hinder us from discerning the things of our Peace; that so by the Power of the holy Spirit of Peace, he would dispose all our Hearts to such Meekness of Wisdom, and Lowliness of Mind, such calm and deliberate long-suffering and forbearing one another in Love, with such due esteem of those whom he hath set over us, as may turn the Hearts of the Fathers to the Children, and the Hearts of the Children to the Fathers; that so we may become a ready People, prepared to live in Unity and Peace. Amen.  
FINIS.