Jerubbaal Justified: Or, A Plain REBUKE OF THE High (pretended humble) Remonstrance and Plea against Mr. Crofton HIS Reformation not Separation: OR, A Plea for Communion with the Church under those Corruptions, and by that disorderly Ministration, to which he cannot Conform, nor by it Administer.  
DEMONSTRATING, T. P. (alias D.) his gross mistakes of Mr. Crofton his Principle and Argument: as also the fallacy and vanity of his pleaded necessity for his (confessed) separation from public Assemblies, which is found insufficient to acquit him of Schism.  
To which is added A Position, disputing the lawfulness of Ministers receiving an imposed Liturgy.  
LONDON, Printed in the Year, 1663.   

TO THE PIOUS AFFECTIONATE READER.  
Christian Reader.  
SHake off prejudice, abate affection, give place to judgement; let not the Christian destroy the man, nor grace (captivating Reasons dictates) dethrone the rational power; understand the object before you embrace or refuse it; know well the nature of the Act before you do, or decline it; prove, hold fast, or reject: Censures are easy and common, but when groundless, they become Calumnies, and retort with sadness on the Censurers head; leaving him under the guilt of false judging, calling good evil, and evil good; condemning the just, and clouding the testimony to the truth; robbing God of the honour, and truth of the strength of his Servants Martyrdom.  
Reformation, The perfection of reformation is the work, the contest of our land and age: I must bear many witness, they have a zeal, but not according to knowledge; their affections fly after that which for want of knowledge, they do not, will not regularly follow; we easily hear what they would have, and what is taken from them; but cannot make them hear how they must have it, and how they must wait in their places until they can have it; and recover what is removed.  
Reformation hath ever failed between Sylla and Charybdis, and in these last days been most sadly battered, and is almost split on the Rocks of superstition and separation: these Rocks are visible, but the course to pass between them without dashing on either, is dark and difficult, and the Devil laboureth to dash us sometimes on the one, sometimes on the other; in one he acts like himself, in the other like an Angel of light; and those lights which should in this straight direct us, are taken down, and in this case did, and do give so dim and uncertain light, that it is a mirror of mercy that any escape Shipwreck, what cause have we to prize any who herein advance themselves, and shine brightly though thereby they expose themselves to the tempestuous assaults and boisterous blasts of men devoted to either extreme.  
Mr. Crofton, as Luther contesting against the Pope, and at the same time the Anabaptists, for first degrees of Reformation; and as Cartwright and others against Prelates and Separating Brownists for further degrees of Reformation; hath exposed himself to, and been afflicted by men of both extremes; and not a little wounded in the house of his friends, who are become his Enemies because he told them the truth; many have censured, calumniated him, who cannot resist the wisdom and Spirit by which he hath spoken.  
Yet rather than truth shall want contradiction, or error scribe by silence, Satan will find and stir up instruments among God's Servants, who shall sharpen the old weapons of most bitter enemies, whereby to assault the assertors of truth, and say something; that simple souls may be deluded, (with a Mr. Crofton is answered) though not one word is said to purpose; nor one Argument urged by Mr. Crofton is at all answered.  
If he be (as I dare affirm he is) a Son in Presbytery who hath lifted up the heel against his Father, let me assure thee Mr. Crofton instead of adjudging him to Cham's curse, will pray he may dwell in the Tents of Shem, he having discovered his own, not any thing of his Father's nakedness, only when it's said a Presbyter, and Scotch Presbyter hath answered Mr. Croftons' Plea against Separation; and that by only urging the old uncharitable Plea of the most rigid Separatists (viz.) God is not worshipped by the Liturgy, the Ministration by the Liturgy is poison, express poison; and to attend God's Worship ministered by the Liturgy, is to go back into Egypt, we cannot but say, tell it not in Gath, publish it not in Askelon; but if it must be heard abroad, let it be known it is a young Presbyter; not overladen with seriousness in consideration, clearness of apprehension, or stayedness of resolution, and in this case of great concernment 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and in his general nature a Scotch Remonstrator; the men of which name made (by a breach of order in Discipline only) such a Schism in the Scotch Kirkes', which was not cemented until confusion broke in upon them.  
Reader, read with freedom what this Remonstrator hath written; only with it compare Mr. Croftons' Plea; thou wilt see his mistake of the Question, Mr. Crofton and his Argument is so manifest, that in all he hath said, he hath said nothing to what he pretendeth to have spoken; nor wilt thou need the fescue of a learned pen, to point thee in the reading thereof.  
I have taken the opportunity of saying something by way of reply to his pretended Answer; more for the sake of truth and thee, then of the Author, (whose conviction I cannot but desire) that I might something more fully and distinctly explain the case in controversy now among us; and those principles on which Mr. Crofton doth determine it and direct himself and others; I have so fully known this good man, his principles and practice, that I can with confidence, and could not but in duty to Truth speak out the same.  
Had Mr. Crofton been in health, thou mightest have had these things more acute, exact and polite, but their plainness may be thine advantage; and it is verity not victory, is by me pursued; I beg of thee to read without prejudice, and judge without passion; I doubt not but thou wilt then give glory to God, and see the way in which thou must walk; for if thou canst but once convince thyself that modification of God's worship is the personal act of the Minister; and so all defects and disorder therein is his personal sin; and that attendance on God's Worship is thy direct act and positive duty; this or that Ministerial mode is to thee an accident put upon thee by the Minister who ministereth thereby; and that to stumble at this or that because humane, which God hath determined, and the nature of the thing doth direct to be humane, is a very great vanity, thou wilt see cause to dismiss thy scruples, and to do in Conscience, what carnal policy and self interest (poor reasons below a Christian) (viz.) fear of a Penal Law, or desire to hear a good Sermon will allow thee in, but can never make lawful to thee.  
Farewell.   

Lest the Remonstrator and his over-affectionate Adherents should say I have in the ensuing Tract stated the Question in coutroversie otherwise than it is stated in Mr. Croftons' Reformation not Separation, (the falsehood of which is manifest from the whole scope of that Book) I have thought it convenient to transcribe such sentences in that Book which contain the Hinge, and Crisis of this Ca●e of Conscience, which thou mayst take as followeth.  Title Pag MR. Croftons' Plea for Communion with the Church, under those corruptions, and by that disorderly Ministration, to which he cannot conform, nor by it administer. Epistle to the Reader. We must either withdraw from the Prayers and public worship of God in this Church, or attend it by this disguised Ministeral mode and order. In the Book. pa. 2 In the use hereof I must of necessity attend that order of administration, against which I have publicly witnessed. Page. 3. My resolution to attend those corrupt Administrations, and that disorderly Service of God, until God please to bring me forth, and make me drink the water of the Sanctuary in purer Vessels. Page. 6. At present I have no choice, if I will attend Gods solemn public worship I must do it in this place and Order, or not at all. Page. 16. Will any object the profaneness of the Ministers, the rudeness and disorder of Ministration; we yield it is too visible, but more vile administrators, and irregular administrations cannot be, than were the Sons of Eli in their service. Specifying  corruptions, which do not vitiate the Subject; Mr. Crofton in our Caese mentioneth these. Pa. 21, 22. Rude unsuitabe Ministerial Method and Order (which is the Vessel and only instrument of conveyance) of Administration. Our imposed Method, disorderly Method of Prayer, under all which Gods Ordinances abide a subject complete, truly and formerly Existent, and distinct from these superadded corruptions, operative unto Salvation, and therefore must not be declined or disowned. Page 24. The Administrations of God's Worship among us, is indeed nauceous, but not void and venomous, our waters are bitter and pudled but not poisonous, to be plain under all our corruptions, we must not, we cannot, we dare not deny the matter and essential form of God's Ordinances, and worship is continued to us. Pag. 25. I confess their Common-Prayer is my burden, by reason of its defects and disorder, and the rudeness of the Ministerial Method etc. yet I find in it no matter to which a sober serious Christian may not say, Amen. and though I distaste the ministerial Method, I cannot disown the Essential form of Prayer. Pag. 26. My good friend, is their no difference between a calling on the only true God in the name of Christ, though in a defective, rude, confused, unfitting order, and praying unto Saints and dumb Idols between the disorderly Administration of the worship for matter and form, Gods own appointment, and the Ordinance nullifying administration in an unknown tongue; so long as we enjoy in her the matter and essential form of God's Worship and Ordinances, though in an Humane, Unfit, Corrupt, Ministerial Method, and Order, with some vain and needless appendents of humane invention, we are not without confidence of God's presence, and a possibility of salvation; we therefore are without a sufficient ground for separation or non-communion. Pag. 35. With all peaceable submission embrace such degrees of Reformation, of the  Order and Ministerial Method of God's Worship, enjoying the substance in the essential form thereof. Pag. 36. Shall we not acknowledge God's mercy in affording us, and humbly use the substance of his own worship, celebrated in a disorderly way and Method? Pag. 37. I must profess to all that fear God, I see no sufficient cause to satisfy my conscience, or to plead before my God, on which to refuse communion with her, (the Church) and attendance on God's solemn public Worship, under her rude ministerial method, for that duty is not warrantably superseded by another man's iniquity. Pag 40. I confess the ministerial order, and method of public worship, and prayer is purely humane, within the power of the Ministers thereof, and so indifferent it ought not to be prescribed and imposed. Pag. 41. This is not my Case and Question, but whether solemn, public worship, my positive duty, etc. which cannot by reason of my confinement be enjoyed, without my attendance on that irregular, unsuitable method and confused order, may be warrantably superseded, etc. Page 42. The ministerial method of God's Ordinances, is charged on the Ministers, not on the members of the Churches. Page 49. I fear to be charged with the omission of God's public worship celebrated in Christ's Church, though with  corruption, and in a rude ministerial Order which ought to be reform. Page 69. The ministerial mode imposed, and sinfully received (by such who subjugate their Ministry) not vitiating the subject, nor nullifying the Ordinances of God, will not warrant my non-attendance on them. 
Christian Reader.  
Impartially judge upon these passages, whether Mr. Crofton doth not clearly distinguish between God's Worship substantially existing in matter and essential form, and the humane ministerial mode by which it is exhibited in and to the Church, and so he hath fixed the Hinge and Crisis of this controversy on this Notion; (viz.) The defect and disorder of the Ministerial Mode, is not to the Members of the Church a sufficient ground for non communion in God's Worship, fully, formally, existing by it; whilst the Remonstrator hath not discerned this, he hath fought with his own Fancy, in his pretended Answer to Mr. Crofton.   

Jerubbaall Justified: OR, A Plain rebuke to the High (pretended) humble Remonstrance and Plea against Mr. Croftons' Reformation not Separation.  
Worthy Sir,  
YOurs the 12. instant I received, and with it a Book entitled Jerubbaal, or the Pleader impleaded, which pretendeth to answer Mr. Crofton's Reformation not Separation: in good time sir, hath Mr. Crofton's papers past nine Months in private from hand to hand, and four Months in public in the world and now answered: if it be to purpose, and truth be beaten out it is well, I will say better late than never.  
I have not sir Communicated the Book to Mr. Crofton as you do desire, his late sickness (not yet recovered) h●th discapacitated him for such work: but I have read this humble Remonstrance, and find in it a Spirit sufficiently high: I shall adventure to give you, (and if you please the world) my thoughts concerning this impleading Plea, against Mr. Crofton's Plea for communion with the Church under those corruptions, and by that disorderly Ministration to which he cannot conform, nor by it Administer: And truly Sir, This Book maketh a great cry, but yieldeth little wool, it may serve the simple (whose good affections to purity lead their judgement not only from, but against duty) to make a noise Mr. Crofton is answered: but the▪ judicious Reader will soon see there is in it vox preterea nihill, and that Mr. Crofton is as far from being answered, as he was before.  
This Author having passed his Mindus like part built on his own Judgement of the expediency of it: (it is reason he enjoy 
Page 15.  his fancy in his own fabric) he abruptly assaults Mr. Crofton on the most gross and manifest mistake of the man, the nature of his Book, and the form and force of his Argument, which could possibly befall and misguide any Antagonist whatsoever.  
Sir, This Gentleman mistaketh Mr. Crofton, and the general nature of his book: he accounteth (and that with more than ordinary heat and confidence) Mr. Crofton the Maecenas and Advocate of the Liturgy and Common prayer book, and an accuser of the brothers: he apprehendeth Mr. Crofton's Reformation, 
Pa. 14. 30.  not separation to be a Plea for the Liturgy, and an Indictment, or accusation of the Saints, cujus contrarium verum est, how just, sober, or warrantable those his apprehensions are, let all impartial, unprejudiced men judge.  
Mr. Crofton an Advocate for the English Liturgy, who can have the face to say it? How will that appear? hath he not preached and written against it? did he ever retract? doth he conform to it? or consent to read it? was not his known opposition to it apprehended to be the cause of his vexations, and bonds he met with in Staffordshire in his late Travels? can envy itself oppose Mr. Crofton to Mr. Crofton: his enemies being Judges, never was any man more square and stable to himself then is Mr. Crofton: these things do indeed give cause to call him Jerubbaal and make it suspicious he is the Gideon who threw down the Altar (if the Liturgy must be so accounted) of Baal: on what ground could this pretender, to reason and religion, cry Mr. Crofton is the Maecenas and Advocate for the Liturgy: hath not Mr. Crofton's Contests, actings and sufferings, manifested him a Monument of God's Grace and Truth; and Sectarian rage and falsehood: will men needs reproach him with that, which none hath as he resisted? Oh Sir, Mr. Crofton hath pleaded for Communion in the Liturgy.  
It is false sir, he hath pleaded no such thing, his Plea is for Communion with God's Church, in God's Ordinances and worship, though Administered by the Liturgy, and that only in case of necessity, when we cannot otherwise enjoy solemn public worship: it is one thing to commnnicate in the Liturgy simply and abstractedly considered, this supposeth an assent unto it, and a personal acting in and by it as a Liturgy: for this Mr. Crofton hath never yet spoken one word: It is another thing to communicate in, and Religiously attend God's Worship Administered by the Liturgy, in which the Liturgy is no more but the vehiculum instrument of conveyance and humane Ministration: the formality of Mr. Crofton's Plea is this: the Liturgy is a rude and disorderly Ministration, an evil which ought to be abolished, by which he cannot Administer, but it is not an evil of that nature, to visiate the Subject, nullify and destroy God's worship, and so warrant the people's withdrawing from that because of this.  
Vulgus non distinguit, that the over zealous vulgar should account this a Plea for Communion in the Liturgy is no wonder: whilst a man of learning doth it with all confidence, is a withstanding of an inserence which the premises will not allow, a justification of the premises, as true and good, cannot a man plead: men must in case of need drink water in unclean vessels, or affirm Citizens must not lose all for want of ask by the rude dialect of their Recorder: but he must be concluded the Maecenas of Barbarisime and nonsense, and Advocate for the Queen of Sluts! may not Mr. Crofton deny such disorder to be a sufficient ground for Secession from God's worship, but he must needs be the defender of that disorder? According to this sober Logic is Mr. Crofton tauntingly represented the accuser of the brethren: and his Book branded as an Indictment against the Saints, what cause is there for this high charge, whom, when, where, and whereof hath Mr. Crofton accused? This Author calls him his accuser, he shall do well to put him to shame by telling the world whereof Mr. Crofton accused him, Mr. Crofton doth in his book suggest groundless, unwarantable, Secossion 
Page 29.  from, voluntary non-communion in God's worship, is a private or negative Separation; the first act towards a positive and total Sepeparation, but is this to accuse the brothers? cannot a Minister suggest the sinful nature of an act, but he must be arraigned as an Accuser of the brothers, oh Charity! oh Sobriety!  
Sir, Who readeth Mr. Croftons' book; and seethe not that it is so far from an Indictment or Accusation of others, that it is a sober, serious, and necessary Apology for himself, and his own practice most groundlessly, unchristianly and incharitably accused by others; and those, some of the brothers; who never administered, or attempted to reprove the things whereof they did accuse him; in his whole Conflicts for Reformation, he had protested he could communicate in God's worship under that order, by which he could not adminester; coming to practise his principles, what Calumnies what Censures did accuse him of defection and Apostasy? and constrain these Letters by way of Apology for himself, And this, thus extorted by false accusations, is most falsely accused to be an accusation of the brethren; Oh! Charity! Oh Sobriety!  
Sir, We cannot expect he should rightly take up Mr. Crofton's Argument, who hath so grossly mistaken himself, and the general nature of his work, let me observe to you his mistake in the very form, and so in the force of what he is pleased humbly to term Mr. Croftons' Doom Argument. 
Page 15.   
Having passed his many needless distinctions, he professeth himself a negative and partial Sepatist; he is best, see to his Warrant, least being loosed from the Harbour he be driven he knows not whither, I am glad he disavoweth Positive Separation, gathering a select Company into a Corner, some who shrewdly guests who this Author is, think they durst presume to charge him as peccant in this respect; but sure I am Mr. Crofton, and other good men, are no little grieved to observe some Presbyters, not only absent from public assemblies, but also celebrate the Lords day by preaching and Ministration of the Lords supper, to a select Company in private, as if they were designed to verify that Independent Calumny; (Presbiterated Churches are gathered Churches.)  
His Separation stated, this Antagonist assaults Mr. Crofton's Considerations; that he might fence with better success, he forceth the chief of them into this syllogism according to his own fancy, not Mr. Croftons' Argument.  
Communion with the Church, visible in all acts of solemn Public worship; is an essential part of the Sanctification of the Sabbath or Lords day, and indispensable Duty of every particular 
Pa. 15. 16.  Christian to be only superseded by an inevitable necessity etc.  
This is indeed Mr. Crofton's proposition; on which this man doth assume, as that which he saith, must be the assumption, and accordingly stateth the Conclusion.  


But Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy, or Common-Prayer (called Divine Service) is Communion with the Church visible in solemn public Worship.  
ERGO. Communion with the Church of England in her Liturgy or Common-Prayer is an essential part of the Sanctification of the Sabbath or Lords day, and indispensable duty, etc.    
Sir, this Argument thus framed is a monstrous Argnment; especially to come from Mr. Crofton; they that ever heard him preach, read his writings, know his person, principles or practice can believe him, such a Maecenas and Advocate for the English Liturgy and Common-Prayer-Book, as to assent and conclude Communion in it, to be an Essential part of the Sanctification of the Sabbath; So as that the Sabbath or Lords day cannot be sanctified where the Service-book is not attended, assented to, and acted in.  
But Sir: What ground or reason in Mr. Crofton's Plea hath this Antagonist, which necessitateth this Assumption and Conclusion as that which he tells us mnst be.  
Mr. Crofton's Book is an Epistle to a Friend, his Argument is not (therefore) logically form, but very legible in the Connexion and scope of his discourse; but this Author doth not in his book, or Margin, cite, or refer his Reader to one single sentence, or word on which he bottometh this assumption and conclusion as that which must be, he indeed hath 
Page 22.  confidence enough to affirm. Mr. Crofton saith, the Liturgy or Common-Prayer is an act of solemn public worship: but doth not tell us where he saith it; and I am sure I have read all that he hath written, and I never found that he said it; I must say, Sir, they say so of this humble Remonstrator, though spoken with so high confidence, is not a sufficient ground for credit: the rather, because the question Mr. Crofton did discuss, and was to bring into conclusion was not; whether Communion in the Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book was an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath: Truly sir, Mr. Crofton hath disputed fairly, if only this Antagonist can find his sillogysme conclude, what never came into his question: his logic hath lately failed him very much: Sir, sure I am? whosoever shall read and regard the scope of what Mr. Crofton hath written on this Argument shall find another assumption and conclusion, than what the zeal and prejudice of this Remonstrator hath assumed and concluded: the true state and form of Mr. Crofton's syllogism is manifest to be this.  


Communion with the Church visible in Gods solemn public worship is an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath and indispensable duty.  
But Communion with the English Church in the worship by her celebrated, is Communion with the Church visible in Gods solemn public worship.  
ERGO. Communion with the English Church (having no opportunity with any other) in the worship of her Celebrated is to me an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath, and indispensable duty.    
This Argument Sir, is far from assuming and concluding the Communion in the Liturgy, is, an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath, and indispensable duty, and that the worship celebrated in the English Church, must be the Subject predicated in the assumption of Mr. Crofton's Argument: is manifest to every one who observeth these passages in his amplifying the consideration which containeth this Argument  
1 Communion with the English Church in the worship by her celebrated; notwithstanding the defects and disorders in Ministration thereof; was the question Mr. Crofton did dispute, and must bring into his conclusion.  
2. He saith to his friend, you yet enjoy a liberty of worshipping God in due and right order, and may drink the waters of the sanctuary in clean vessels i e. Without the Liturgy its Rites and order (it is manifest this he intended) long may you enjoy 
Reformation not Separation  it, and if God take pleasure in me he will in due time restore me to it, Sr. is it likely Mr. Crofton would assume and conclude the Liturgy is that solemn public worship which is an essential 
Pag 6.  part of the sanctification of the Sabbath, and indispensable duty; whilst he professeth he had sanctified the Sabbath, and worshipped God without it, and hoped for a restored liberty so to do again as a token of divine favour to him; he acknowledgeth it to be his friend's privilege, prayeth the continuance, feareth the loss of it; that he did enjoy a liberty to worship God in due and right order without the Liturgy, he complaineth of of it as his affliction that he had no choice, but was under a necessity of attending God's worship in this order Ministered, or he must enjoy no solemn public worship of God. Sr. all men must confess those things will not square with an argument that shall conclude Communion in the Liturgy is an essential part of the sanctification of the Sabbath etc. but they are exactly square with an Argument for Communion with the Church in God's woship there celebrated, though Ministered with rudness and disorder.  
3. Mr. Crofton as a conscientious Christian, and serious Casuist, having concluded Communion in God's worship was his indispensable duty, in the general; enquireth what specialty might become a moral bar, and warrantable supersedeas to the 
Reformation not Separation.  same, hereupon he considereth what is pleaded by the Separatists who abound among us; and among other things the Liturgy by which Gods worship was ministered in and to the Church, admitting the defects, disorders, and corruption 
Pag. 25.  charged on the same, he concludeth they are great, and evil, but not an evil of that nature and quality, as to constitute a sufficient bar to Communion in God's worship ministered by the same. Sr. it is manifest the worship concluded by Mr. Croftons' argument. (and the scope of his whole discourse on this consideration,) is distinct from, though ministered by the Liturgy, and that this is considered as a moral bar, or warrantable supersedeas to that, but is found insufficient.  
Sr. our Antagonist having thus mistaken and misformed Mr. Croftons' argument, must needs be concluded to fight with the fancies of his own prejudice; and so I might dismiss him, but Sr. I seek verity, not victory, and would if possible he may see his mistake more plainly upon the whole case of this Controversy, in which Mr. Croftons' conflict is the more uncomfortable because single, and failed by those whose place and duty oblige them to his succour: but the Conquest is most certain to him fight for the truth against all extremes for vincit veritas: I would therefore direct a word to this Remonstrator, and tell him in his ear, if instead of those many needless and some groundless distinctions he hath multiplied, he had well weighed and closely pursued the Criticisms in this case stated by Mr. Crofton, he had saved this labour, or written with better success, and more satisfaction to his Reader, if he will not be offended I will note unto him a distiction or two, according to which Mr. Crofton doth move, and on which this controversy doth depend.  
Sr. This Remonstrator maketh much ado, in distinguishing 
Pag. 22.  solemn public worship, by persons, place, and reality, in which he fighteth with his shadow, for Mr. Crofton would not differ with him, about them; though I believe he will dislike his expressions concerning them, instead hereof he should have observed Mr. Crofton hath distinguished between.  

1. The substance of solemn public worship, which consisteth in the matter, and essential form of every ordinance, both which must be determined by the Lord and directed in his word.  
2. The Ministerial mode of worship, or that humane dress, in and by which it's celebrated in and to the Church, which is not determined by the Lord, nor directed otherwise then as to its general nature, as that it be serious, reverend, grave, and the like, in the word, but is wholly left to the wisdom and faithfulness of such to whom the Ministration of solemn public worship is committed.   
Unto this distinction our Remonstrator should have added this second viz.  

Communion in God's worship, thus or thus administered, which consists in an humble, reverend, attendance on, and acting in the worship of God, as harkening to the petitions pronounced, and sighing or speaking an Amen to them, and the like.  
Communion in this or that mode of ministration: so as to assent unto it, and act decently in it: as the Minister's administration by it, or the people's personal actings in popular Responds, contamations or corporal gestures, required by it without any relation to, or direction from the worship of God.   
Sr. These distinctions are manifest in themselves and manifestly necessary to all understanding Christians the worship of God in its substance consisting of matter, and essential form, is clearly distinct from the humane dress, and ministerial mode by which it is celebrated in and to the Church; preaching the word is God's worship, by him determined: for matter, his word, will and mind, for form preached, solemnly spoken, discoursed in and to his Church: but that the preaching be an analytical explication, or metaphrastical amplification of any portion of Scripture, whether it be by Doctrine, Reason, and Use, or only a discourse argumentative to confirm an Article of faith, or confute an error is indifferent, undetermined by the Lord, left to the wisdom and faithfulness of the Preacher; and this or that mode is clearly distinct from God's Ordinance of preaching, which is fully, formally existent in and to the Church by any, by every mode which the edification of the Church shall dictate, and the ability, wisdom and faithfulness of the Preacher shall determine.  
The Methods and Phrases of administration of the Sacraments by previous or subsequent exhortation to duty, discourses of their nature, use, and end; and prayers so modified and phrased, are apparently distict from the Sacraments, those parts of God's worship, which substantially exist, when water, bread and wine, the right matter, are ministerially applied in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, as significant sealing memorials of Christ's death, body and blood; the assential form of God's ordinance and instituted worship. The same Sr. is considerable in prayer, the substance of which ordinance doth consist in a calling upon God in the name of Christ for things agreeable to his will, so that where things agreeable to his will is the matter; and calling upon God in the name of Christ is the form; by whatsoever humane mode, order of speech, phrase, words, sentences, the same is performed in, and for the Church it doth substantially exist, is distinct and to be abstracted from the same.  
Sr. on this first, the second distiniction doth manifestly arise, viz. it is one thing to Communicate in God's worship, preaching prayer, or Sacraments, substantially existing in any, in every ministerial mode, and dress by which it doth exist in and to the Church; although these cannot be divided when God's worship doth exist in to the Church (for God cannot be worshipped by men, without the humane ministration of his ordinances in some▪ suitable mode) yet they may be easily and plainly distinguished so as that the Church and particular members may know their distinct interest in Communion; the people in the general nature of the worship, substantially existing Gods, in matter and form, in and by any humane mode whatsoever, as that which concerneth and so charged on them, all in common, and the Minister the specifical and ministerial mode of administration of God's worship between God and his people; which is personally incumbent, and charged on him by virtue of that office for modification of God's ordinances, which he hath received from the Lord.  
Sr. These distinctions are not more manifest in themselves, then that they are Mr. crofton's, in this very case and controversy; I would not that this Remonstrator should think I come to relieve Mr. Crofton, with any distinctions, which are not his, and plainly legible in the plea he doth implead, be pleased therefore to observe Mr. crofton's own words. Under all our corruptions, we must not, we cannot, we dare not deny the matter, and essential form of God's ordinances and worship is continued to us.  
Again Sr. in this very and special case of the Litugy Mr. Crofton 
Reformation not Separation.  thus writeth; I confess the Common-prayer is my burden, by reason of its defects and disorder, and the rudeness of the Ministerial method; I stand convinced it ought to be altered, ye abolished, etc. Yet I must confess I find no matter in it, to which on a charitable interpretation, a sober serious Christian may not say or can deny his Amen: and though I distaste the Ministerial method, 
Page 25.  I cannot but observe in it the essential form of prayer viz. a calling 〈…〉 the name 〈…〉.  
Sr. Can any terms make these distinctions more plain, and yet Sr. these occasion in Mr. Croftons' plea for his Communion two more, which do arise from, and depend on these.  
The first concerning corruptions, which he considereth to 
Pa. 20. 21 22, 23.  be  vitiating the subject, nullifying Gods ordinance, destroying God's worship, and so necessitating separation.  

 superadded to, concomitant with, and conversant about God's Ordinances, which notwithstanding doth exist for matter and essential form perfect and entire, capable of due operation, as stinking fish doth nourish, or water pudled, or taken in an unclean vessel doth quench the thirst, and preserve life.   
This distinction, this humble Remonstrator, doth with some scorn observe, and pass by as of little or no weight, though the case of conscience now controverted, doth depend upon it, and directeth the next distinction viz.  

Reformation which supposeth the subject to continue substantially the same, but attended with some circumstantial corruptions, the removal of which must be endeavoured, but these notwithstanding the subject may with safety, and it must in duty be used.  
Separation supposing the subject so vitiated, that it cannot be used with safety, without sin, and must therefore be shunned.   
These distinctions most humbly slighted, I wonder at, that this Remonstrator should fly out so high, as to cry out Mr. 
Page 24.  Croftons' instances of stinking fish, pudled water and unclean vessels yield not the least satisfaction to me; for it is evident to any impartial Reader his prejudice never suffered him, to find the form, and therefore he could not feel the force of the argument; for if the Liturgy be but a vessel though unclean, this argument  corruptions, being consistent with Gods true worship, will not warrant a secession, or negative separation, appeareth very cogent, and is well amplified by the instance of pudled water or an unclean vessel.  
Sr. These distinctions being not more manifest in themselves, and to be used by Mr. Crofton, in the plea which this Antagonist doth implead; then to be Crisis of this Controversy; the the hinge on which this great case of conscience doth turn. I will presume on my friend so far, as to present you with some short and plain Aphorisms concerning God's worship, and his people's communion; you may (if you please) call them Mr. Croftons' Creed concerning communion with God's Church, I cannot but commend them to the observation of God's people & consideration of God's Ministers, as those which few sober men will deny to be true, and being well understood would readily direct a godly man's course in the hour of temptation which is come upon us.  
1. The Church Catholic visible distributed (through necessity, and good order) to particular Assemblies must sanctify the Lords day by an holy Convocation.  
2. The Congregation of particular Christians convened in full and open joint Assembles, to celebrate Gods solemn worship, is the formality of an holy Convocation: in which every particular Christian must make conscience to be present, and continue from the beginning to the end of the ministration of God's worship, they must assemble on the sound of the silver trumpets, and not departed without the Priest's blessing.  
3. The worship celebrated in the holy Convocation for the matter and essential form by which it substantially existeth, must he determined by the Lord, and by him alone: all other matter though in a form by God directed; or the matter without the form by him appointed, is supperstition to be avoided; a dogshead or Swine's blood offered by a lawful Priest, and with Levitical Rights, and Incense in the hands of Chora Dathan, and Abiram, or a Lamb and Bullock offered by the lawest of the people at Dan and Bethel, are eqully abominable to the Lord, Baptism by fire in the name of Father Son and holy Ghost or by water in the name of God the Father, and time the Mother of all things is equally void and vile, no worship of God.  
4. All worship of men's invention superadded to God's appointment must be avoided, abandoned by every of God's people, but Gods worship substantially existing with the same must not be disowned or declined: the mountains of Israel, the Temple must be frequented, devoutly resorted unto, though the high places be on the one, and the Image of jealousy be in the other; these superadded evils provoke God, but the Simbolls of his presence continued, bind his people to due and constant attendance: the Cross in Baptism is to be (if possible) avoided but Baptism formally existing must not be disowned, declined, because the other is superadded.  
5 Gods worship celebrated by and among men, must be ministered, and exist in an and by an humane mode and dress suitable to, and so fit to edify such a Creature and society. God's word and Sacraments, his people's prayers, must be ministered in, and by modes, methods, words and actions, invented by the mind, expressed by the tongue, and performed by the hands of men.  
6. The humane mode and dress, words and phrases, by which Gods worship must exist, and be ministered in and to the Church is not determined by the Lord, but wholly left to the wisdom and faithfulness of them who minister the same, hence it comes to pass, that the substance of God's worship continueth the same, in respect of matter and essential form by and under various ministerial humane modes; God's word is preached, though some times one way, and sometimes another; the Sacraments are formally administered, prayers are truly made, and the one and the other is God's Ordinance, the same unto all subjected to it, though the ministration thereof doth  according to the various Gifts of the administrator.  
7. The humane Ministerial modification of God's Ordinances in and to the Church is the formal act of the Ministerial Office to be fulfilled, and performed by the Ministerial gifts, the personal abilities, of every individual Minister, who is guifted of God, and ordained by the Church for that purpose. Gospel Ministry is an office in God's Church authorising enabling, its subjects not to institute any new worship for matter or form, but to Minister the worship appointed by the Lord in an humane mode, and order, such as may edify the Church: the matter is the determination of God, the Ministerial mode is the digestion of the man, invested with an office to that purpose the word and the preaching of it is appointed by God, the mode, and terms in which it is preached, to reproof instruction, or correction is the work of the officer, ordained to preach; he is guifted, and authorized to dicotomize, divide the word aright; the case is the same▪ in Sacraments, Prayer, Censures, all which must exist in, and too the Church by the Ministerial mode and order, words, and expressions, in which the Minister entrusted with them, doth exhibit the same to them: herein each Minister must employ his Cinisterial gifts, his personal abilities; this is the service he must do to God, and his Church; he is a steward of the Mysteries of God, to distribute his master's Goods with the utmost of his skill and faithfulness: dicotomization of God's word, modification of God's worship, is the work in, and by which he must approve himself a workman which needeth not to be ashamed: in this he cannot without sloth and porfidie assume, another man's mode, or suffer himself to be imposed upon; so as to veil his own received gifts and to administer by the modes, and forms digested and composed by others.  
8. The ministerial mode, and order of God's worship being wholly humane, determined by men's Wisdom and faithfulness, it is and cannot but be subject to much & great corruption in defect, & disorder rudeness, & irreverence in expressions; some Ministers are rash and inconsiderate, unaffected with the Majesty of God to whom they approach, in whose stead they stand, in and to his Church unacquainted with the nature of the ordinance to be administered by him: and the quality of the Church in and to which he doth minister (which things are the only dictator's of that mode by which they minister) there are many times rude, preposterous, rash, irreverent full it may be of nonsense, and cautologies, in the modes by which he doth minister; some are proud and curious, and in their carnal policy compel an uniformity, in ministerial mode, not necessary, yea sinful; (restraining ministerial gifts, and the Church's profit by their variety) these pretend to correct some men's. rudeness, and irreverence, by imposing their own prescribed composed forms and modes of ministration (to the open violence, and almost subvertion of the office of the Ministry) these again met, with men of slothful, or slavish spirits, who are idle and neglect their own ministerial gifts; whilst others (on pretence to peace and obedience to superiors) do admit them the forms composed by others; betraying the office they have received from the Lord, no wonder to find defects and disorders in the ministerial mode of God's worship, whilst the same is wholly dependent on men of weakness, subject to folly and infidelity: the best of men and Ministers need a Priest to make attonen enter for their holy things.  
6. The guilt of all defect and disorder in the humane ministerial mode of God's worship is immediately, properly, and directly personal, charged on the Minister, and on him alone: not on the Church, or any the members thereof. The guilt is proportioned to the duty, modification is a personal duty, charged on the officer appointed to that office: this guilt may indeed (as other sins) by accident be derived to the Governors of the Church, who should, but do not set up, and ordain men to the Ministry, and suspend, and put down such who want ability, well and rightly to modify and minister God's worship and Ordinances: and to the peo, i'll and individual members, when they observing defects and disorders in the Ministerial mode of worship, donot grieve for the sin of others, and complain of it as burdensome to themselves; and in liberty of choice, if they do not choose better, but sit contentedly under the same. Eli by the first, brought on himself the sin of his sons, profane ministration, and the God-fearing Israelites delivered themselves by the last▪ but there is no common reason which can derive the sin of rude Ministration on the people.  
10. All defects, disorders, rude and impertinent expressions, in the hnmane, ministerial mode of God's worship: are corruptions, circumstantial, and extrinseal in, and by which Gods worship may substantially exist in matter, and essential form, capable of operation to its appointed end. The Scriptures are read, though in parts and parcels, and in a corrupt, imperfect translation: all which are evil: and abate the efficacy to edification: but are not such evil, on which we may conclude the Seriptures are not read, or cannot edify the hearers: the word is preached, and may profit the hearer, though the Sermon be raw, rude, indigested, immethodical, and in wild and unfit expressions. Prayer is presented to God, though defective in some matter, to be desired, disorderly in the manner of expressions, uttered with abruptions, abreviations, pauses, and postings one again: None of these evils do vitiate the subject, or alter the matter or essential form of God's Ordinance, so as to destroy the substance: these make Gods worship not so serious, grave, and reverend as it should be: but these, notwithstanding it doth truly, fully, formally exist God's worship: the third, not second Commandment is hereby broken. God's name is truly but not rightly used: he is truly worshipped, but th●se adjunct qualities which should attend his worship are wanting: the want of reverence and right order in the ministration of his Ordinance doth provoke▪ God, but will not conclude he is not at all worshipped.  
11. Defects disorders and corruptions in the ministerial mode of God's Ordinances fixed, continued and reiterated, are more sinful and offensive to God, and his people then those which are present and transient, but both these are sins of one and the same nature and quality, and of equal influence on Gods worship ministered by the same. Corruptions fixed and reiterated, are more wicked because more deliberately, and wilfully used: more offensive to God's people because foreknown: like the rude ministrations of Elies' sons, they make the Lords people loath the offerings of the Lord, but yet they enter not into God's Ordinance, so as to vitiate the same, and make it cease to be his prayer, is no less prayer when pronounced by the defective, disordered forms which are fixed and reiterated; then when expressed by the raw, rude, irreverent modes, presently conceived by the Minister: the last may be more excusable in the Minister, and more comfortable to the people: but prayer is as truly formally, existent God's worship under the first: the fixed reiteration of a defective, disordered ministerial mode of worship addeth to the degree: but altereth not the nature and quality of the sin.  
12. No defects, or disorders in the humane ministerial mode, (whether fixed and reiterated in, and by imposed, and prescribed forms, or expressed in, and by present, transient conceived forms, in and by which Gods worship doth substantially exist, for matter and form his, in and to his Church) will warrant any Christians secession, voluntary withdrawing from the holy Convocation, or non-communion in God's worship so ministered: for these, notwithstanding God's worship doth truly, fully, formally exist, capable of operation to its appointed end: 2. This sin is purely personal, chargeable on the Minister, who standeth charged with the office of ministerial modification of God's worship, in, and to the Church: the people or particular members of the Church, may and must pass on this (as other personal acts) a judgement of charity, which doth direct them to grieve for the sin existent; to complain of it, and as they have opportunity to admonish the sinner: (though the sons of Eli) of it, and seek the correction and removal of the same; but they have not of it any judicium publicum, judgement of Office, charged on them, by the specialty of duty: and armed with a just moral power of correction, so as that the same should be the neglect of this public duty become their sin, and leave its guilt on their souls: that God's worship formally exist in every mode of ministration: every Christian and member of the Church must judge and see: for by this corruption, the holy Convocation ceaseth, and they worship not God: but the mode itself is personally charged on the Minister: the defect and disorder is an accident resulting from the sloth, negligence, ignorance, weakness and unfaithfulness of the Minister, and an adjunct separable from Gods worship existent by the same.  
Sir▪ I pray you take good notice of this, that the private Christian, and particular members of the Church have no public judgement of office, concerning the Ministerial mode of God's worship: for Sir, it is a notion of much weight, and use in this Case, and it appeareth plainly true, if the modifying of God's worship, be, as it cannot be denied to be the personal act of an Officer appointed to that end: moreover Sir, if the people have a public judgement of the ministerial mode of God's worship, we are under a necessity of having what we so much complain against, and cast off, (viz▪) a fixed Liturgy for the mode of Prayer, Preaching, Ministration of Sacraments: must then be known to the people, and judged by them free from all defect and disorder, before the people can attend God's worship in that Ministration: it must be confessed impossible, for a single Minister constantly to communicate to every particular member of his Congregation: the mode into which he hath (by his personal abilities and ministerial Gifts) cast the word Prayer and Sacraments: no serious, sober Christian can think the people to be guilty of those rude methods, indigested, raw, expressions tautologies, solecisms, and disorders, which a Minister may utter in his preaching, and praying, yet this is inevitable if the people have a public judgement by special office, of the ministerial mode of God's worship: it is indeed true, the defective, disordered mode of worship which is fixed, stated, and so from time reiterated is more obvious and offensive, than what is transient, and so by the judgement of charity more burdensome to the people, the grief of it being continued and renewed: but it is the judgement of office, armed with power to correct, deriveth the guilt of the one, or of the other.  
I hope Sir, our Remonstrator will by this time see, that he hath most grossly mistaken Mr. Crofton, and the whole scope and nature of his Plea, and the very Crissis of our present Controversy, he will sure now see Mr. Crofton pleadeth not for Communion in the Liturgy, he is positive in it: a Minister cannot without sin minister God's worship by this (or a much better) mode (if generally and exclusively imposed) of worship, he never yet advised, justified, or defended the people's personal acting, by conclamations, popular responds, and groundless variation of Gestures, the part allotted to the people in, and by it; and this is Sir, properly Communion in the Liturgit. Sir, Mr. Crafton▪ doth consider the Liturgy in its general nature, a Ministerial mode, conveying some part of God's shorship, in, and to the Church, the which he confesseth is defective and disorderly, and therefore the grief and burden of the Lords people; but it doth not vitiate, destroy, or nullify the worship ministered by the same; but that it substantially existeth for matter and form God's worship, capable of operation to its end, by reason whereof the people having no choice of a better, and more orderly ministerial m●de, must, (though with grief, and a burdened spirit) attend the same; blssing God they have his ordinances, though in a● unclean, unhandsome vessel, or rudely mangled, or ill favouredly carved; so that Communion in God's worship thus ministered; not Communion in this ministerial mode is Mr. Croftons' Question.  
S●. I havering corrected this Remonstrators most gross mistakes, shall now take a view of the strength of his argumentation, in 
Pag. 16. 17.  what he supposeth to be an answer to Mr. Crofton's plea.  
To his falsely form argument, or Syllogism he saith, his answer shall be by  

Concession.  
Distinction.  
Retortion.   
In the first part of his answer, viz. his Concession he yieldeth to Mr. Crofton; the truth of the Church of England; about this we dispute no longer, only some who will clap him on the back, for appearing an Antagonist against Mr. Crofton will think by▪ this Concession he hath given away his cause.  
S●. One thing I cannot pass without observation; and that 
Pag. 19  is, an expression wildly let fall, to which I cannot consent to him viz. personal corruptions in scandalous professors, or other Church members, (Minister (as well as others) the Hophni, and Phineas of our age) defils the Church: this I understand not, nor doth he tell us whether it defile the Church immediately, and of itself, or consequently and by accident, the defect of the Church, in some duty incumbent upon her, intervening▪ to derive the sin unless by this last way; personal sin, and Church guilt, are a contradiction: the profaneness of Elies' sons was indeed charged on their Father Eli, and that by accident only: but I never read, nor can find it was charged on the Church of Israel; the God fearing Israelites did deliver themselves, by their robukes of their disorder, without forbearing to bring their offerings to the Lord, though they were rudely Ministered by profane hands.  
By way of Distinction.  
Here he distinguisheth between Communion by 
Pag. 19 20.  Profession, Participation.  
How warrantable, and well grounded this distinction is, I shall not now consider; I do not find Mr. Crofton to be concerned in it; only I must tell this Remonsttator, I understand not the necessity, and prrviledges he appropriateth to Communion by profession, (if that profession be abstracted, from, and opposed to participation) calling upon God, worshipping, God, and the visio salvit●ca are not had▪ or done by a ba●e profession of the true religion, but do require personal participation, pation, to make man enjoy, the privileges to them belonging.  
Again I must tell this Remonstrator, Mr. Crofton will deny 
Pag. 21.  there are many, or indeed any members of the universal Church; (he sure means visible and militant, or it squareth not with his discourse) who never had opportunity of assonating themselves with, or joint communion in the solemn worship of God; for if they be actual, formal members of the Church visible, they had an opportunity to be made such; men as we are not members of the Church; saving faith may give relation to the Church Catholic invisible, but membership with the Church Catholic visible, could not be had without an opportunity of joint Communion in God's worship in some particular Assembly.  
The Whole improvement of this distinction by this Antagonist is only to infer what Mr. Crofton had yielded, yea interminis stated, viz. Communion in God's worship, with God's Church is an indispensable duty of every soul called by the name of God; to be only superseded by the real inevitable necessity of some natural (such as is humane violence) or moral (such as is the certainty of sin by such Communion) ba●e. About this therefore we are agreed.  
The Remonstrator maketh another distinction of public solemn worship in respect of  

Persons worshipping.  
Place of worship.   
Reality of matter, and Constitution of the worship.  
On what ground he multiplieth these distinctions I see not, unless on a mere fancy that Mr. Crofton determined the worship of God to be solemn public in, and because of those places appointed, and used to that end in this nation; unto this 
Pag. 26.  conjecture I am lead by his hot assertion, locality under the Gospel is mere matter of indifferency; God having only stamped sanctity on places among the Jews. Mr. Crofton bearing me witness: for which in his Margin he quoteth Mr. Crofton his Altar worship. page 77. but good Sir, what needs this heat? Mr. Crofton did witness this assertion in his Altar worship: hath he unsaid it in his Reformation not Separation? he pleadeth for communion with the Church: but did he ever confine the Church to any place? he saith private particular members may not withdraw themselves, or deny communion, with the holy Convocation or Church assembly, wheresoever it is held; but he never denied the Church or holy corrvocation was convened, and (if necessitated) may be again convened in woods, caves, dens, or poor cottages. Mr. Crofton doth grant the Church is an holy convocation in any place assembled, but he doth deny that 10. 20, 30, or 40. private particular Members, (among whom may be a Minister by his office a Public officer) assembled in a place distinct from: it may be opposite to the Public Assembly, is a Church or holy Convocation: and truly should he grant this, he must be at a loss how to know a Conventicle or determine a Schismatical Assembly, and throw down the Banks of all Church order.  
That the Church of England's Liturgy, or Common-Prayer 
P●. 28. 29.  (the great Apple of strife) is a part of this Real solemn worship of God, and Communion with her therein is an indispensable duty I must (saith this Antagonist) take leave to deny: and Mr. Crofton will reply to him, do so and welcome; for greater zealots for the Liturgy, than ever Mr. Crofton is like to make, will not once affirm that the Liturgy is a part of real solemn worship of God: it is not properly any worship at all; it cannot then be real solemn worship of God: the Liturgy in the strict form, and general nature of it is not worship but a Political (though Ecclesi stique) order and direction, unto praying, reading the Scriptures, and Ministration of Sacraments; methinks this learned man should not confound; real solemn worship, and a Political order relating to solemn worship; they are in themselves manifestedly distinct. wherein the Liturgy doth prescribe, and impose set forms; and certain words by, and in which Prayer, or other parts of worship must exist in, and to the Church it is only a Ministerial mode, exhibiting worship; it is not worship itself: I hope this acute disputant, will not affirm the form or mode into which he casteth, and by which he expresseth Prayer, is real solemn worship: I hope calling upon God in the name of Christ, for things according to his will, is the formality of solemn worship, and that his, or other men's forms expressing the same, is only the ministerial mode, by which it is exhibited in, and to the Church.  
Sir, How vain, and frivolous, are these highflown Epithets, which this humble, Remonstrator doth give the Liturgy humane ordinance, super-erogatorie worship, arbitrary service, Scripturebitten worship: whilst it is not at all worship: but almost a Politic Order; and Ministerial mode of Worship: but I must take up: lest by correcting a mistake, I also be branded to be the Maecenas and Advocate of the Liturgy: We shall hear more of this in the next part of his answer, which he saith is by way of  
Retortion.  
And what is it that he recorted on Mr. Crofton?  
Communion with the Church of England, may be superseded by real inevetable necessity, exeoncessis: by Mr. Crofton's own Doctrine, and assertion; but mine (that I may put in for a supersedeas, 
Page 31.  is a real inevetable necessity saith the Remonstrator: If so sir, is this a Retortion? I should have thought it to have been more properly accounted ajoyning Issues, according to Mr. Crofton's Rule: which he could not, doth not, deny to be a Rule of truth, not to be avoided: but binding all non-communicants in God's worship to assign and plead the inevetable necessity which must be their warrant for secossion, so as to acquit them from Schism, or sinful separation: Let us hear sir his inevetable necessity pleaded, and herein he tells us.  

He cannot communicate in two things:  
1. In the Liturgy  
2. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper.   
He cannot communicate in the Liturgy, nor did Mr. Crofton ever advise he should: But I hope he will assign a good reason why he cannot communicate in God's worship Ministered by the Liturgy: he saith he joineth with the Church in▪ Prayer, praises, and hearing the word: he sure will not deny the reading of the word to be a Public Ordinance of God, and part of public solemn worship: he will I hope manifest an inevitable necessity for his own non-communion in that: and for his absence from any, those Prayers which are by the Church put up unto God.  
The necessity of my noncommunion in the Liturgy (saith this Remonstrator) is grounded on invincible doubts, about the Lawfulness of such a constitution:  
Sir, I cannot but pity the man, doubts are a Rack to the 
Pa. 32.  mind: and being invincible he is like to live in constant bondage: Sure I am, Mr. Crofton will consent, he follows his conscience though erroneous being duly careful, and humbly studious to certify, rightly inform the same: But sir, methinks he vexeth his soul, entangleth himself and seeketh to ensnare others with a needless scruple, viz. Whether he may communicate, where the constitution of a thing is unlawful: Mr. Crofton is at no distance with this Remonstrator as to the lawfulness of the censtitution of the Liturgy he will not stand to admit his 3. Maxims in reference to God's worship  

What is unuseful is unlawful  
What is unnecessary is unlawful  
What is in his general nature not commanded is unlawful.   
But they come not into his Question: nor hath these things any thing of answer, to any thing pleaded by Mr. Crofton, for Communion in worship ministered by the Liturgy.  
But Sir, the constitution of the Liturgy being granted to be unlawful, and what ought not to be; the Question yet abides, Whether the Liturgy, being an unlawfully constituted mode of solemn public worship, be so far unlawful, or unlawful in that kind and quality of unlawfulness, which will constitute a warrantable reason for non-communion in that worship of God, which is ministered by the same: Sir, all things unlawful, and relating to God's worship, will not warrant non-communion in God's worship; he must therefore specify an unlawfulness in the Liturgy, which will be of the kind and quality which riseth thus high, or he doth nothing; and I confess, were it not for some fallacy in his terms, more than (I apprehend) is in his mind, he doth this 
Pa. 29. 35  to purpose, it is this, The Liturgy is no worship of God, but will-worship, etc. no reason than he should communicate in it as such: But Sir, how shall we understand his words? they are capable of a good and true sense, for the Liturgy is no worship of God; nor is it any will-worship; for, as I have before noted, it is not any worship at all, but a political order, at the most an bumane ministerial mode relating to God's worship: But Sir, the whole scope of his Book, and bend of his spirit, maketh me assured, this sense came not into his mind; but rather this, The Liturgy is not God's worship, i. e. it is an 
Page 30.  unlawful constitution, and God is not at all worshipped by it, or in the use of it; he therefore concludeth, his crime is in not joining in prayer in such a dress or form.  
And Sir, this sense maketh his words an assertion so horrid, and uncharitable, that he professing himself an Antisectarian, I would (if I had once ground to support my Charity) hope he did not intent it; for Sir, this is the old notion urged by the brainsick Brownists, and others repelled and reproved by the old non-Conformists.  
Sir, the truth is, in this sense he must be understood, or in none to this purpose; and then be pleased to observe the height, rather than strength of his Argument.  
If the Liturgy be not God's worship, (i. e.) God's worship be not celebrated by the modes and forms directed in the Liturgy: it than followeth, our first Reformers and Marian Martyrs, rejoiced in, and died under a mode of divine worship, by which God could not be worshipped: all our pious painful preachers ministered by, and all the Christians in the time of Queen Elizabeth, King James, and most of the Reign of King CHARLES the First, attended on a mode, dress, or form, by which God was not worshipped: all the Ministers who now minister in public, and all the people in England who now attend the same, do minister by, and attend a mode, form, and dress, by which God is not worshipped: and all who have been baptised, or received the Lords Supper in and by the modes, and forms directed in and by the Liturgy, have been mocked and deceived, and enjoyed no Sacraments; and then Sir, judge you whether England be not Paganized, and the Independents have not reason to gather Churches in England.  
Sir, this man saith, his charity must be only judged by God; sure I am, he giveth men (by such an assertion as this is), little cause to think he hath much; for a more notorious breach of charity, cannot befall the most rigid Separatist, the Church of England ever knew.  
But Sir, what reason doth this Remonstrator render, why God is not worshipped by the Liturgy? it is this, the manner (for the matter he yields; and essential form he cannot deny, of the worship) the form and dress is humane: we grant it Sir, so is the mode and form of his studied Sermon, and conceived Prayer; will he be willing we should conclude God is not worshipped by them? will he stand by it that the ministerial mode of worship is determined by the Lord in his Word? if so a reading ministry may serve God's Church, for there is no need of other ministerial gifts; I would advise him to recollect his thoughts, and see whether he can deny, that it is Gods will, in condescension to men's weakness, that the ministerial mode of his worship, be determined, digested, by the wisdom and faithfulness of his Ministers gifted and appointed to that purpose.  
Sir, though the Liturgy is a mode of worship obnoxious to exception, and unlawful; yet it is only a ministerial mode, whereby in reference to Prayer, right matter is requested from the Lord, in the Name of Christ, and so God's worship doth substantially exist for matter▪ and essential form, and he is worshipped by the same; nor doth it at all vitiate God's worship, because it is in itself an humane mode and form; for God's worship cannot exist in, and to the Church, but by a ministerial mode and form humane, invented, digested, by men: And now Sir, where is our Remonstrators inevitable necessity for non-communion in God's worship ministered by the Liturgy.  
Sir, the imposing of this Liturgy may be in itself an evil, but it doth not alter the nature of it; but that God is as truly worshipped by it when imposed, as when left at liberty, and his worship is as fully, formally, though not so orderly ministered, and existent in, and to the Church by this, as any other humane mode, form, and dress whatsoever.  
One thing more I must not pass without observation, and that is; this Antagonist saith, I know Mr. Crofton doth attribute the essential form of Prayer to it, (pag. 25.) which he describes to be a 
Page 39  calling upon God in the Name of Christ, but if he understand not by the Name of Christ the will of Christ, than I say it is not a right description of Prayer.  
Sir, I will assure him, Mr. Crofton did not understand by the Name of Christ, the will of Christ, and yet I must tell him, it is but one Doctor's opinion that this is not a right description of Prayer; he might have been pleased to observe in the same page, Mr. Crofton determined the matter must be according to the will of God; and the will of Christ doth require some adjunct qualities, as gravity of expression, fervency of affection, and reverence in demeanour, which come not into the definition of Prayer, as essential to its form; but in the Name of Christ, that is, for his sake, merits, and mediation, cannot be left out▪  
Sir, I now leave our Remonstrator on his Rack of doubting, praying God may show him mercy; not doubting, but whatever they be to him, you see his doubts are not invincible to others▪ for Mr. Crofton's argument stands yet firm, viz. The worship of God existing for matter and essential form, his own in substance, though by the Liturgy, (a defective, disordered, unlawful mode) may not be refused or declined, this mode only by this reason because it is humane, maketh not an inevitable necessity of communion or secession.  
2. Our Remonstrator cannot communicate in the Lord's Supper, under the present modes and methods of ministration in the Church of England: and his ground is the imposed gesture of kneeling, the superstition and corruption which attends it.  
Sir, What superstition and corruptions▪ attend the ministration of the Lords Supper? in which he must personally act, so as to become guilty of the same, I see not; nor doth he specify any, the gesture of kneeling excepted: that the ministerial mode of this Ordinance is disordered, I can allow him, but this, as in other parts of public worship, is personal to the Minister, and him only, there is a possibility of his composed, reverend attendance on the Ordinance, without any personal acting in those popular Responds, and Conclamations, which are directed to the people in and by the Liturgy.  
As to the gesture of kneeling, I do not find that Mr. Crofton doth speak one word for it, or that he ever advised any to it; I well know he doth not yield it, nor approve it: I have heard him say, that If he be put by the Communion in the Lord's Supper, because he will not receive the Elements in that gesture, he is barred from his duty, and privilege, by an act of violence he is driven, he doth not go from God's Ordinance. It is Sir, worth the enquiry, whether this professed Separatist negative, have tendered himself to Communion in the Lord's Supper, and tried whether there were not a possibility of enjoying it without the gesture of kneeling: for Sir, secession without all endeavours, and under any possibility of Communion without what we conceive to be sinful, cannot be acquitted of Schism or sinful Separation.  
Sir, I cannot but conceive this Remonstrator to have in himself a fair latitude concerning the Gesture of kneeling; he saith, I could go near to approve of the Gesture of kneeling, being left arbitrary, and 
Page 41.  commended or practised only as an outward badge of more than ordinary thank fullness, under the reception of an extraordinary blessing, and not as an act of piety, necessity and worship. Sir, the now Zealots for the English Ceremonies? will join issues with our Antagonist, and tell him kneeling at Sacrament is not act of worship, but only a reverend and pious badge▪ of more than ordinary thankfulness, in reception of an extraordinary blessing; and will refer him for proof to the Rubric in their new book, which doth declare kneeling is a signification, of our humble and grateful acknowledgement of the benefits of Christ therein given to every Receiver? and the imposition is justly capable of a dispute; the Rubric seemeth to do littte more than commend this Gesture, only directing the Minister to deliver the Elements to the people all meekly kneeling; and the legality of the Canon, by him quoted is justly questioned; so that his reasons on which he could go near to approve the Gesture, seems to be so clear, that we may wonder he should not communicate in the Lord's Supper, much more that he should fly so high as to conclude Poison positive poison; his Charity is large; who can judge all that ever did; all who do now communicate in the Lord's Supper, celebrated by the Service-Book, and by the Gesture of kneeling are poisoned, expressly killed by poison, this Charity will better become a total and positive Separatist.  
Our Remonstrator having (as he conceived assigned) a sufficient warrant for his confessed separation; in what he seemeth to answer to Mr. Croftons' 2d▪ and chief Consideration; proceedeth to consider some others, his next assault is on Mr. Croftons' argument from the high places in Israel, the high places were not taken away, but the people went thither to worship; yet I find not that any God-fearing Israelite, who loathed those relics of Idolatry, ever barred themselves, 
Page 43.  because thereof, from God's Altar and worship.  
Sir, I cannot but observe what a fair leap our Antagonist maketh; passing many considerable Arguments, urged as most proper, pertinent, and regent in our Case, amongst others the instance in the sons of Eli, who failed in the Ministration of God's worship, taking their own part, before they had burnt the fat, according to Gods own appointment; and not contented with the portion God had allotted to them, they took by violence what came next hand; insomuch that the people of the Lord loathed, yet never durst leave the offerings of the Lord; this disorder in the Ministerial mode of worship; runs higher than that of the English Liturgy? yet the sin is not charged on the people; but this, and arguments of the like nature, are not worth the observation of our humble Remonstrator? but be it so, let us consider his batteries against Mr. Croftons' plead from the high places in Israel. 
Page 44▪   
1. He tells us the retention of Jewish Ceremonies in the Christian Church, is (God knows) a just cause of complaint, did Mr Crofton ever deny it?  
2. Reduction of them after sacred and solemn expulsion is more grievous, who denies it? what reason doth Mr Crofton give for his and shall we not complain? whose complaints for retrogradation of Reformation, have been more audible and affectionate than Mr crofton's? who hath more pressed or provoked the Complaints of Gods Israel? and shall we cry to him; what and shall we not complain?  
3. M● crofton's alleged Case of the Israelites high places, (he saith) is infinitely wide of ours, Sir, it must be ours according to his wide mistakes? for according to Mr. Croftons' close argumentation, it is very near, and pertinent; the objection M. Crofton doth obviate by the Israelites high places, he hath indeed transcribed; but not once regarded, or considered? (viz) do men complain of some Roman Rites retained? let them consider the high places in Israel: what is the form, and force of this analogical argument? Roman Rites retained, is unlawful matter superadded to God's worship? which substantially existeth with the same; the high places were unlawful matter supper▪ added to God's Temple and Altar, which subsisted with the same, the Israelites left not God's Altar, because of the supper▪ added matter of the high places; nor may Christians leave God's true worship, because of the superadded matter of Roman Rites: Sir, are not these cases now infinitely wide? but we will weigh the distance he observeth.  
1. He saith the high places were retained; our Roman Rites restored: what then restoration may aggravate the evil, but doth it change the nature of the corruption; high places and Roman Rites whether retained or restored, are only evils superadded to God's Altar and worship, with which these do truly formally exist, may and must be attended; the relapse of a Church reform doth add to its guilt, but not abstract its being; return of expelled evils do much more provoke God but not vitiate the subject his ordinance to which it is superadded; restoration of corruption maketh sin sink deeper in the Church, or subject of such restoration, but it is the qulle of the Corruption must sink into and subvert the worship of God to which it is affixed, so as to vitiate and destroy the same.  
2. He saith the Israelites were confined to God's Altar in a certain place; 
Page 45.  and Mr. Crofton saith Christians are confined to God's worship in certain assemblies; true constituted Churches, such as our Antagonist yieldeth England's Congregations to be; Mr. Crofton denieth not local liberty, or the place of worship to be the matter of indifferency; the man is mistaken, locality never became a Topick of any force to Mr. Crofton he saith to a true Church, a lawfully constituted Christian assembly, meet, assemble where you will and can, that which he saith against the lose affections of some Christians, apt to wander, is, forsake not the Assembling of yourselves together, as the manner of some is: let Christ's flock lie where it will or can, all particular members must keep Company with them; and have good reason before they refuse it; Christ's true assemblies are to Christians, what the fixed place, and altar was to the Jews.  
3. The high places were at most but Idolatrous places, but our worship is superstitions worship: and into this runs his fourth note of distance, and disparity in this Analogy, the Israelites worship was good, and place bad, but our place is only good and our worship is bad: No marvel Sir, if Master Croftons' inference be to him a Nonsequitur: but Sir, This Charity is again the fruit of his separation, and will carry him beyond the negative part of it; how? our worship superstitious? our worship bad? this cannot be admitted; who is the object of it, is it not God in Christ? what is the matter of it, it is not things instituted, appointed by the Lord himself, Word, Prayer, Sacraments? what is the form which giveth the esse to it? is it not what God determined, that his Word be read, preached, that he be called upon in the Name of Christ for things according to his will; that the symballs by him determined, be given and received as significant, sealing memorials, of the death, body, and blood of Christ? is not this the substance of the worship ministered in the English Church, and much of it by the English Liturgy? is this superstitious worship? bad worship?  
Had our Remonstrator said, the Ministerial mode of God's worship by the Liturgy had been bad, disordered, and not without some mixtures of superstition; he had not had Mr, Crofton for his Antagonist; but this vitiateth not its subject; entereth not into the worship; so as to make it superstitious worship, bad worship, the worship hereby existeth truly, fully, formally, God's worship though not so comfortable, not so profitable to God's people, as a better and more orderly mode for Ministration; but this will not do his work, his inevitable necessity faileth; his separation appeareth sinful, a schism unless he confound the worship and Ministerial mode, so as to make the worship bad, superstitious, and not God's worship.  
Sir, before we pass this part of our Remonstrators Answer, I cannot but observe he is at a loss for what he pleads against: he crieth, What doth Mr. Crofton plead for? 
Page 46   
Alas man, that should have been known before now, and at the beginning of your Debate; it might have saved you this labour and time; What saith he, Is it my presence in the Church at the time of Divine Service? yes it is: but not as his large Conscience, can yield it, in an Idol Temple, at the Mass, or Turkish Koran; which I am sure Mr. Crofton, or any good understanding Christian could not yield: nor will his necessity to avoid penal Laws, or to bear a good Sermon justify his so doing: no matter what Religion is publicly professed, this man is secured from suffering, for he (to save his Estate) can foot it with a Church-Papist, to a Popish Mass, or Protestant Service; and if presence in the Idol Temple in the time of Idol Worship may be made the Character by a penal Law, you shall never know him for a Christian; if this necessity would have been sufficient, we should have had a much shorter Catalogue of Martyrs, both under Pagan, and under Papal power, then by God's grace we have for our encouragement.  
But Sir, that he and others may certainly know what Mr Crofton pleadeth for; I will tell him, It is for this Christian, careful carriage on God's Sabbath. It is a presence in the solemn public Assembly from the first to the last of their approach to God, out of Conscience to begin and end the holy Convocation.  
A presence with a mind informed, a judgement convinced, that this Assembly is God's Church, in which Gods true Worship is truly celebrated.  
A presence with an heart affected with, and afflicted for the superadded Rites, which are affixed to God's Worship, and the sinful defective, disordered mode, by which Gods Worship is ministered.  
A presence with a Conscience convinced these Corruptions are evil, but not so evil as to destroy God's Worship; but that the same doth (even by this sinful mode) exist truly, formally Gods Worship; so as to use God's Ordinance with delight, though grieved, burdened by the disorder of the ministration.  
A presence with a mind persuaded the modifying of God's Worship is the personal duty of the Minister, and so the defects and disorders therefore his personal sin; so as that these may be the good man's burden, (being bound to mourn for other men's sin, especially in what so much concerneth his own profit, and edification) but cannot be his sin, who hath thereof no public judgement by speciality of Office.  
A presence with a mind soberly vigilant over its own personal actings, so as to decline all popular responds, conclamations, and variation of Gestures, and the like actions, which are unduly required, from him; so as to contain himself under such disorder in a composed silence.  
A presence with a serious apprehension of God to whom the service is directed; and the nature of the Worship ministered; so as with reverence to attend the Word read, and Prayers pronounced, though in parts, parcels, with unfit intermixtures, abruptions, abreviations, and pauses; so as to sigh and speak out an affectionate Amen, the whole, the only vocal part of the people in public Worship.  
Sir, this is the presence which Mr. Crofton pleadeth for, as that which true Religion, and good order doth require, and direct, whilst Christians cannot enjoy God's Worship in communion with his Church, by a ministerial mode▪ more regular, perfect, and profitable, digested by the personal abilities of each Ministrator.  
Sir, our Remonstrator proceedeth to another of Mr. Crofton's Considerations, and that he accounted his second, but in the order of Mr. Crofton's Book it is the third, viz.  Communion with the Church under▪ many and great corruptions, is not inconsistent with zeal, care and contest for Reformation. Page 46, 47, 48. 
What he saith to this is partly true, That endeavours of Reformation are a duty; that Connivance is an argument of Affection▪ Communion an argument of Connivance; the negative part of Reformation, bindeth ad semper, and the like; all which Mr. Crofton hath asserted, and amplified in his Plea: nor doth he detract or deny them; but these are generals, in the application of which our Remonstrator followeth the mistake of the Question, which hath misguided him throughout his whole Remonstrance.  
Herein, like an acute Disputant, he correcteth Mr. Crofton's state of the Question, and profoundly tells us; Mr. Crofton 
Page 47.  had done well to have stated the Question aright, de ecclesia reformanda, & de ecclesia reformata: Good Mr. Remonstrator may not ecclesia eadem, be eodem tempora reformata, & reformanda, what if a reformed Church relapse into some of tee same Corruptions, which were solemnly expelled, is she not ecclesia reformanda? is there no cure for her but ruin? and no carriage towards her, but to relinquish and run from her? doth the Crisis of the Question lie in her relapse, and retrogradation in Reformation, and into the same corruptions which had been solemnly expelled; or in the quality and nature of the corruptions which are returned into her? if her relapse be into , circumstantial corruptions, which notwithstanding the substance of God's Worship, and salvability of God's people is continued, and secured, is not the Question then plain, Whether communion with her relapsed into such corruptions be not consistent with zeal, care and contest for▪ Reformation? and who will deny that? but if the relapse into intrinsecal, and substantial corruptions which vitiate the subject, and destroy God's Worship, and the salvability of God's people; then indeed separation, not only negative, but positive is a duty.  
But Sir, I wish the Remonstrator may review Mr. Crofton's Plea, and see that he doth consider the English Church reform, relapsed, and to be reform, and pray he will consider relapse, and retrogradation is the aggravation of the Church's sin, and provocation of Reformers zeal; but, the quale of the corruptions, whether first introduced, or after solemn expulsion returned into it, is that which must direct, and determine Communion or Separation.  
But Sir, no state of the Question doth, nor indeed can be expected to suit his misguided zeal, but what is square to his mistaken judgement; he therefore here again c●ieth out of Communion in Corruption; Communion in the Liturgy; and according to the uncharitable fancy of the old brainsick Brownists, and most rigid Separatists, his Dialect is, It is no Worship; God is not Worshipped; it is a going back into Egypt; it is poison; I. will die of famine rather than of poison; and the like, which is every where scattered up and down his Remonstrance.  
To all this I know, Mr. Crofton will grant to him Communion in the Corruptions, Communion in the Liturgy is not consistent with endeavours for reformation: But Sir, herein lieth the difference between Mr. Crofton and this Antagonist, the one maketh corruptions the direct immediate object of Communion; the other doth make God's worship substantially for matter and form, only Ministered by such a corrupt mode, and with such and such corrupt appendants conversant about it, which enter not into it, the object of Communion; Mr. Crofton saith, we must communicate in God's worship hereby Ministered; and the Remonstrator saith, we do communicate in the corumptions, in the Liturgy; Mr Crofton is so fare from pleading for Communion in the Liturgy, that he saith Ministers cannot without sin use it, for they are Judges? and stand charged with the Ministerial mode of worship; and non-ministration by it is the least Art of reformation; nor doth he plead for, or justify the personal actings of the people, in those popular Responds, 
Read h●s Reformation not Separation.  Conclamations, and groundless change of Gesture, which is their part of Communion in it as a Liturgy; nay, so fare is Mr. Crofton f●om pressing Communion in the Liturgy, that he maketh attendance on Gods worship ministered by the form of the result necessity; and blameth the same in a case of choice, or liberty, to enjoy God's worship in a more orderly and regular mode.  
If Sir, the Remonstrator will not take the question as it is stated, the case of Conscience as it stands, and came close to the crisis of the Controversy, if he will not distinguish between his food, and the unclean vessel, and ill-favoured carving which doth transmit it to him, if he will not differ between a necessity of feeding in such vessels on good wholesome food, illfavouredly carved▪ and mangled, or starving, and a liberty and choice of a better and more orderly ministration; he may be afraid of and all his days fight with his shadow; for he fighteth not with Mr Crofton whose question is manifest in, and through his whole book, to be about necessitated Communion in God's worship in such an unfitting Ministerial mode.  
Sir, Mr Crofton would not have any reforming Christian go back, or retreat from the degree of Reformation they have attained: but this is the case, and private Christians duty; the forum of the Church visible (at least the particular to which they relate) is changeable, and changed, yet consisteth of such who are true and lawful though it may be not pious) Ministers of the Gospel, these are Judges; and do assume, & by their office impose on the Church a Ministerial mode of God's worship, which is rude, disorderly, and was solemnly expelled; the people and particular members do nauseate, are burdened at this mode, yet cannot deny God's worship doth truly, formally and salvably exist in and by it, they have no public Judgement of, nor moral power to correct this mode, may passively attend, & personally act their part in God's public worship, without any personal acting in the Ministerial mode; must they in this case not keep their places? but recede from Communion, and resolve to live without solemn public worship, not knowing how or where to have it better Ministered? Sir I would entreat our Remonstrator to let his future discourse turn on the binge of the controversy; or his answer will be rejected as a groundless and forced creaking, not more unpleasant than unprofitable.  
Our Remonstrator doth suggest something from the Oath, called the Solemn League and Covenant, (of which he speaketh in such terms, as speak little of wit, or honesty, and less Scotch zeal) as making for his fancy argumentum ad hominem at least.  
Sir, we all know that Oath is become a Noli me●tangere, I must not plead for it, but this I will tell you, Mr. Crofton who hath reason, (having studied and disputed it, and deeply suffered for it) to understand that Oath will undertake to plead his principle, as that to which that Oath doth oblige; I will in his behalf note these three things considerable in this Case, to which that Oath doth bind: they are these.  
1. It obligeth to Reformation in Worship, which supposeth worship doth fully and formally exist, defiled with some  corruptions which must be removed, expelled; but still the subject must be owned and secured; not declined or refused whilst we conscientiously attend Worship, we must carefully endeavour it may be as pure, as it is true.  
2▪ This Reformation must be endeavoured in our places and Calling by lawful means, but the private capacity of particular members of the Church, dispose them to endeavours by no means but what result from the Judgement of Charity, viz. observing other men's sin, they must grieve for it; admonish even Elies sons to forbear it; Complain to God and superiors, humbly petitioning a Reformation by their public authority; and in case of choice, and liberty, attending Gods worship ministered in a better Ministerial mode; but in case of necessity, rather than not attend God's worship truly, salvably existing, their place doth bind them to attendance on it in this mode? but with a grieved, burdened, complaining, supplicating spirit; that this evil may be reform, bringing their offerings to the Lord, whilst they loath and rebuke, are grieved for, and complain against the Profane Ministration of the sons of Elie.  
3. This Reformation must consist with real sincere endeavours to extirpate schism, as well as superstition; Mr Crofton hath well cautioned us, that the Devil doth labour to reform the one, by running as upon the other sin; but the grace of God keepeth 
Reformation not 〈…〉.  us in an equal opposition to both: Now▪ unwarrantable secession from God's worship, this very Remonstrator grants is a separation, and a sin, and although it be but negative and 
P●ge 46.  partial, yet it hath in it the formality of Schism: our Remonstrators inevitable necessity we have found before doth varlish; on his mistake he must assign another, and that from the nature and quality of corruption, or impossibility of communion in Gods true worship, without communion in the ministerial mode, which is evident may be abstracted from the worship; and Mr. Crofton doth affirm is a personal act, though of a public Officer to a public end  
Sir, the whole of what the Remonstrator saith in this point of Reformation is this: Mr. Crofton saith, the matter, (and he should have added the essential form, for so Mr. Crofton saith) 
Page 48▪  is good, but the outward mode is bad, and to be reform; this our Remonstrator very often and with great humility calleth Mr. Crofton's recocta Crambe; and yet as often as it is boiled by Mr. Crofton, it hath no good connection in this man's stomach; all the nurture he draws from it, is but like Scotch Keal, which turneth into wind and vapour.  
Sir, our Remonstrator must yet have this cram recocta, it is the Crisis of this Controversy, till it be digested, this Case of Conscience cannot be resolved; Mr. Crofton grants, that the whole frame and constitution of the Liturgy is to be reform, removed; but he deemeth it to be adulterate worship and affirmeth it to be only a desective, disorderly ministerial mode of God's true worship, of which the people hath not public judgement, and by which they may enjoy God's Ordinances, capable of operation to their end, without any communion in this mode, which is personal in a public Officer to a public end, and must therefore be reform by the endeavours of all in their places, and without unwarrantable secession, negative separation, formal Schism, and so a sin.  
They who have made a Schism between Pastors and People by an act of violence, and exaction of what must not be yielded, must be pitied and prayed for, but not paid in their own Coin by us, or repelled by our personal sin and Schism: I desire to serve God, but God keep me from serving him by my sin; where sin is God's instrument, judgement (his strange work) is his business, and the fire is usually prepared for such Instruments, when their work is done.  
Our Remonstrator stumble●h on another Sentence of Mr. Crofton's Plea, for indeed he no no where taketh the scote, or understandeth the form and force of any Argument; he 
Page. 5.  faith Mr. Crofton saith, I cannot without trembling consider the circumcised Sects in the Church of Corinth, (Colosse he meant) are charged to have left the head, by leaving the body: This our Antagonist saith is a strange Argument, unless his non-Communicants be proved to be circumcised Sects, and guilty of such corruptions as will amount to a not holding the head.  
Here Sir, our Remonstrator (who taketh no Argument right) is run out into another mistake; as if Mr Crofton did allude to the circumcised Sects for their corruption, who alludeth to them for their separation, not holding in the body, and so not holding the head; be the corruptions of any Church or People what they will; a separation, and unwarrantable separation from God's true Church is a leaving the body, and so not holding the head; the estate of which is so dreadful, that every good man cannot but tremble to see any in the least appearance thereof, motion, or tendency thereunto.  
Sir, What our Remonstrator doth urge in case of scandal is no contradiction in these to Mr. Crofton, in what he hath asserted: but in hypothesi he hath run on his old mistake, Is communion in the Liturgy a positive duty? is 
Page. 53.  his Quaerie: Mr. Crofton saith, No; but communion in God's worship ministered by the Liturgy, is a positive duty to such who have no choice, and cannot enjoy God's worship in communion with God's Church Catholic visible, in a better ministerial mode and order.  
2. Saith he, is not the Liturgy indifferent? Mr. Crofton faith, No; it is not: not as the Bishop told him, because imposed, but because a formal positive evil, but yet it is not an evil of that nature and quality, as to intercept the indispensible duty of communion in Gods true worship ministered by it, when we have no choice.  
3. Saith he, Will not scandal accrue by Mr. Crofton' s communion, as well as conformity in the Liturgy; Mr Crofton saith, It will; but he denieth all communion in the Liturgy; and his nonconformity is the act of non communion in his capacity, as a Minister; his non-personal acting in any the popular Responds, Conclamations, and groundless variation of Gestures, is the evidence of his non-communion, as a Member of the Church.  
Mr. Crofton is sensible, men, and good men, are, and will be scandalised by his communion in God's worship, ministered by this mode; but this is by accident, not from the nature of his act, but from the ignorance and weakness of those who take it, and therefore are no bar to his duty; indeed weak, though good men may well stumble, when this man of Learning hath no more brains, then to confound communion in God's worship ministered by the Liturgy, with communion in the Liturgy, and so conclude Mr. Crofton a Maecenas and Advocate for the Liturgy.  
Sir, That which is the great stick, and stumble with many, though this acute Disputant doth not urge any thing against it, is this principle which some men (whose judgement should be better) is pleased to call proprium Degma to himself, (viz.) I can communicate in God's worship ministered in that humane ministerial mode and order, by which I cannot administer.  
Sir, The general reason of this his resolution, is the modification of God's worship in, and to the Church, is the personal act of the Minister: If Sir, this act be personal, the Minister may not be imposed on, all sins in the ministerial mode, are his, who ministereth; and they extend not to the Church, unless by accident through some defect of their own: Sir, this general might be amplified by these particulars.  
1. A Minister by his Office stands charged to modify God's worship by his ministerial gifts, and personal abilities; he may not therefore be imposed on, be the modes imposed never so good; he may as well admit composed Sermons, as composed Prayers, and forms for Administration of Sacraments.  
2. Every Minister hath a public judgement of the ministerial mode by which he ministereth the worship of God, and doth qua Minister, as a public Officer, receive this, and reject that; so that if he receive a mode defective and disorderly, the sin becometh his.  
3. Every Minister is personally active in the ministerial mode by which he ministereth, so that he mangleth Scripture, and doth personally act all that disorder which is in it.  
These things are well illustrated by Mr. Croftons' allusion to the Recorder of the City, or Speaker in Parliament, and show good reason why he cannot conform to, Minister by such and such a ministerial mode.  
But his ministry (as to exercise) being superseded, and he resolved into the state and capacity of a private member of the Church, considereth,  
1. This ministerial mode is evil, but not such an evil as vitiateth the subject; God's worship doth truly, formally, salvably, (though not comfortably or so prositably as by another) exist in, and to the Church by it, and I cannot have Gods Ordinances in communion with God's Church without it.  
2. In this ministerial mode, the members of the Church are purely passive, they according to their duty, assemble to worship God; the Minister charged with the bumane mode, doth assume a Minister by this, the which the members of the Church do not advise or choose, nor any way act in, but composedly attend the worship of God hereby ministered unto them, and exhibited for their Amen: so that the sin is personal, not public and common, no way derived to me, unless by my neglect to mourn for this, as any other sin in another.  
3. Though this mode of worship do direct some acts to be done by the people, yet I am Master and Judge of my own action, and can withhold, and refuse it, so that in the whole ministration I act not, but in my Amen to the prayer thus modified, and my attention to the worship thus ministered, and the sinful mode is by, and to the Minister, and him alone.  
Sir, Let not any infer, that on these grounds we may attend a Mass and be innocent: For Sir, the corruptions in a Mass are such as vitiate the Subject, and destroy the worship of God.  
1. It is celebrated in an unknown tongue, and so doth not exhibit any worship; it is to the people, vox & preterea nihil, it is a frivolus objection, I understand Latin, when the Church, who understandeth it not, is the subject of the worship to be done to God, the Question is of public communion, not my private and personal adoration.  
2. The Mass doth pray to the Saints, a wrong object; in the name of the Saints, a wrong ground, for some unlawful things; wrong matter of prayer, God's worship is not herein existent, but destroyed.  
3. The Mass maketh the Sacraments Sacrifices for the quick and dead; transubstantiateth the Elements, and so changeth the nature of the Ordinance in the very nature and esse thereof.  
We are Sir, at last, arrived at the last quarrel our Remonstrator picketh at Mr. Croftons' Plea, in which he is exactly square to his mistaken self.  
Mr. Crofton saith, I am not without the caution and conduct of sober, godly, learned promoters, and pursuers of a perfect and complete Reformation.  
To this the Remonstrator saith, It is strange Mr. Crofton 
Page 54.  should argue from communion amongst distinct Churches, against the non-communion of present members of one and the same Church, since that is a communion not by participitati●● and joint fellowship.  
How Sir, not by participitation and joint fellowship? that is strange; though not by constant participitation personal, by their individual members, yet by joint fellowship in the same substantial worship, and occasional participation reciprocally, each with other, by their particular members cast into this or that Country: Sir, can other Reformed Churches hold communion with England, if her worship be no worship of God? will-worship, Scripture-bitten, will-worship? Moreover, Mr. Crofton observed 
Reformation not Separation.  the Reformed Churches disowned not, on occasion declined not, never advised their travelling members to decline communion with England, her Liturgy notwithstanding, they sure concluded 
Page 43.  God's worship was thereby ministered.  
Again, this Remonstrator telleth us, Mr. Croftons' instance in the primitive Non-conformists, is wide of that of the modern; it is true, and Mr. Crofton tells us in his Plea, He was sensible of it, they administered by this ministerial mode, which Mr. Crofton saith, He can better excuse than justify; yet the distance is not 
Page 44.  so great, as this man's wild fancy doth dream; they were under the same corruptions for kind, which are returned upon us; yet Hildersham, Ball, Nichols, Hind, and others maintained the duty of communion in God's worship, under, in, and by them, against Brown, Barrow, and other Rigid Separatists, who urged this man's grand Argument, it was not God's worship, and it was will-worship: I know our Remonstrator disowns relation to these men, and their Sects, yet sheltereth himself under their shield, and fighteth with no weapon, but what was forged on their Anvil, and in their Shop, only he addeth ours is an estate of relapse; that is indeed true, and aggravateth our sin, but altereth not the nature and quale of the corruptions; if these corruptions returned do vitiate the subject, and destroy God's worship, they did so when first inovated, or continued in the first Reformation; for as I have before urged it is only the quality, not the degree of the evil must vitiate God's worship, to make it poison, express poison.  
Sir, I have done with this Remonstrator, when I have told him Mr. Crofton is a Peter, who can receive the rebukes of a brother Paul; but the rebukes of a Zeal, mistaking matter of fact, doth only retort on the Censurer, with a what doth your arguing reprove?  
I am Sir, Your Obliged Friend, R. S. Febr. 13. 1662.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
Worthy Sir,  
YOu cannot but have heard, that Mr. Crofton in his late travels, had a Paper taken out of his pocket, it was a rough Draught of his highway thoughts which he committed to paper, to communicate to a now Conformist, a good friend of his; himself had not another Copy, for whilst it was in his hand, it was never transcribed by himself, or any other; I having, with some difficulty, procured a Copy thereof (from one relating to the Gentleman who took it from Mr. Crofton) have presumed to send it you, that if you think good, you may make it public, and thereby capacitate our conforming Clergy, to resolve (if they can) one of the great Scruples which barreth Mr. Croftons' Conformity and Ministration by a Liturgy; however, the world will see what a Maecenas and Advocate he is for Liturgies; This Paper being since his Plea for Communion.  
Vale.  
FINIS.