Bishop Sanderson's JUDGEMENT Concerning SUBMISSION TO Usurpers.  
LONDON, Printed by for Richard Marriott. MDCLXXVIII.   

Bishop Sanderson's JUDGEMENT Concerning SUBMISSION TO USURPERS.  
SIR,  
WHEREAS you desire to know what my judgement and practice is concerning the using or forbearing the established Liturgy (either in whole, or in part) in the public Service of God, and Office of the Church: If it be any satisfaction to your Friend, I shall fully acquaint you what my practice is (whereunto if my own Judgement be not conform, I am, without all excuse, my own condemner) and upon what considerations I have, according to the variation of the times, varied from myself therein.  
So long as my Congregation continued unmixed with Soldiers, as well after as before the Promulgation of the Ordinance of the two Houses for the abolishing of the Common Prayer, I continued the use of it, as I had ever formerly done in the most peaceable and orderly times, not omitting those very Prayers, the silencing whereof I could not but know to have been chiefly aimed at in the Ordinance (viz.) three for the King and Queen and Bishops; and so I did also though some Soldiers were casually present, till such time as a whole Troop coming to Quarter in the Town (with a purpose to continue a kind of Garrison or Head-quarter among us) were so enraged at my reading of it the first Sunday after they came, that immediately after Morning Service ended, they seized upon the Book, and tore it all in pieces. Thenceforward during their continuance there for full six months and upwards (viz.) from the beginning of November till they were called away to Naseby Fight in May following, besides that for want of a Book of necessity I must, I saw that it also behooved me, for the preventing of farther Outrages, to wave the use of the Book for the time, at least in the Ordinary Service; only I read the Confession, the Lord's Prayer, all the Versicles, and the Psalms for the day. Then after the first Lesson in the Forenoon Benedictus or jubilate; and in the Afternoons Cantate. After the second Lesson also, sometimes the Creed, sometimes the Ten Commandments, and sometimes neither, but only sang a Psalm, and so to Sermon. But in all that while, in the Administration of the Sacraments, the Solemnisation of Matrimony, Burial of Dead, and Churching of Women, I constantly used the ancient Forms and Rites to every of them respectively belonging, according to the appointment in the Book; only I was careful in all the rest to make choice of such times and opportunities as I might do them with most secrecy, and without disturbance of the Soldier. But at the Celebration of the Eucharist I was the more secure to do it publicly, because I was assured none of the Soldiers would be present.  
After their departure I took the liberty to use either the whole Liturgy, or but some part of it, omitting sometimes more, sometimes less upon occasion, as I judged it most expedient in reference to the Auditory, especially if any Soldiers, or other unknown persons happened to be present. But all this while the substance of what I omitted I contrived into my Prayer before Sermon, the phrase and order only varied, which yet I endeavoured to temper in such sort, that any person of ordinary capacity might easily perceiwe what my meaning was, and yet the words left as little liable to exception or cavil as might be.  
About two years ago I was advertised (but in a friendly manner) by a Parliament man of note in these parts, that at a public Meeting at Grantham, great complaint was made by some Ministers of the Presbyterian Gang, as I afterwards found, of my refractoriness to obey the Parliaments Order in that behalf. The Gentleman told me withal, That although they knew what my judgement and practice was, yet they were not forward to take notice of it before complaint made, which being now done in so public a manner, if they should not take notice of it, the blame would lie upon them. He therefore advised me to consider well what I had to do, for I must resolve either to adventure the loss of my Living, or to lay aside Common Prayer; which if I should continue after complaint and admonition, it would not be in his power, nor in the power of any Friend I had to preserve me. The effect of my then Answer was, That if the case were so, the deliberation was not hard: I having long ago considered of the case, and resolved what I might do with a good Conscience, and what was fittest for me in prudence to do, if I should ever be put to it (viz.) to forbear the use of the Common Prayer Book so far as might satisfy the letter of the Ordinance, rather than forsake my Station.  
My next business than was to bethink myself of such a course to be thenceforth held in the public work in my own Parish, as might be believed neither to bring danger to myself by the use, nor to give scandal to my Brethren by the disuse of the established Liturgy. And the course was this, to which I have held me ever since.  
I begin the Service with a Preface, and an Exhortation inferred to make Confession of Sins; which Exhortation I have framed out of the Exhortation and Absolution in the Book, contracted and put together, and expressed for the most part in the same words and phrases, but purposely here and there transplaced, that it might appear not to be, and yet to be the very same.  
Then follows the Confession itself in the same Order; it was enlarged only with the addition of some words, whereby it is rather explained than altered. The whole frame whereof, both for the fuller satisfaction in that particular, and that you may conjecture what manner of addition and change I have made proportionably hereunto (yet none so large) in other parts of the holy Office, I have here under-written.  

O Almighty God and merciful Father, we thy unworthy Servants do with shame and sorrow confess, that we have all our life long gone astray out of thy ways like lost sheep; and that by following too much the vain devices and desires of our own hearts, we have grievously offended against thy holy laws both in thought, word, and deed. We have many times left undone those good duties which we might and ought to have done, and we have many times done those evils, when we might have avoided them, which we ought not to have done. We confess, O Lord, that there is no health at all, nor help in any Creature to relieve us; but all our hope is in thy mercy, whose justice we have by our sins so far provoked. Have mercy upon us therefore, O Lord, have mercy upon us miserable Offenders: Spare us good Lord who confess our faults, that we perish not, but according to thy gracious promises declared unto mankind in Christ jesus our Lord, restore us upon our true Repentance into thy grace and favour. And grant, O most merciful Father, for his sake, that we henceforth study to serve and please thee by leading a godly, righteous, and sober life, to the glory of thy holy Name, and the eternal comfort of our own Souls, through jesus Christ our lord Amen.   
After the Confession the Lord's Prayer with the Versicles, and Gloria Patri, and then Psalms for the Day, and the first Lesson: After which in the Forenoon, sometimes Te Deum, (but then only when I think the Auditory will bear it) and sometimes an Hymn of mine own, gathered out of the Psalms and Church Collects, as a general Form of Thanksgiving (which I did the rather, because I have noted the want of such a Form as the only thing wherein the Liturgy seemed to be defective). And in the Afternoon, after the first Lesson the 98th. Psalms, or the 67th. than the second Lesson, with Benedictus or jubilate; after it in the Forenoon and Afternoon a singing Psalm. Then followeth the Creed, with Dominus Vobiscum; and sometimes the Versicles in the end of our Litany [From our Enemies defend us] if I liked my Auditory, otherwise I omit the Versicles. After the Creed, and instead of the Litany and the other Prayers appointed in the Book, I have taken the substance of the Prayer I was wont to make before Sermon, and disposed it into several Collects or Prayers, some longer and some shorter, but new modelled into the language of the Common Prayer Book much more than it was before. And in the Pulpit, before Sermon I use only a short Prayer in reference to the hearing of the Word, and no more. So that upon the matter, in these Prayers I do but the same thing I did before, save only that what before I spoke without Book, and in a continued Form in the Pulpit, I now read out of a written Book broken into parcels, and in the reading Desk or Pew. Between which Prayers and the singing Psalms before the Sermon, I do also daily use one other Collect, of which sort I have for the purpose composed sundry, made up also (as the former) for the most part out of the Church Collects, with some little enlargement or variation; as namely, the Collects Adventual, Quadragesimal, Paschal, or Pentecostal, for their proper seasons; and at other times Collects of a more general nature, as for Pardon, Repentance, Grace, etc. And after one or more of them in the Forenoon, I usually repeat the Ten Commandments, with a short Collect after them for Grace to enable us to keep them.  
This hath been my practice, and is like still to be, unless some happy Change of Affairs restore us the liberty of using the old way again, or it be made appear to my Understanding by some able charitable Friend, That I therein have done otherwise then I ought to have done: For I may say, that I have not yet met with any thing in Discourse, either with my own Reason or others, of sufficient strength to convince me that I have done any thing, but what may stand with the Principles as well of Christian Simplicity as Prudence.  
There are but three things, that I know of, that are of any consideration opposed, viz. 

1. The Obligation of the Laws.  
2. The Scandal of the Example.  
3. The unseemly symbolising at least with Schismatics, if not partaking with them in the Schism.    

1. Law. Object.  
The first and strongest Objection (which I shall therefore propose to the most advantage of the Objector) is that which is grounded upon the Laws, and their Obligation: For it may be Objected, 
That every humane Law rightly established, so long as it continueth a Law, obligeth the Subject (and that for Conscience sake) to the observation thereof in such manner and form as in the same Law is prescribed, and according to the true meaning and intention of the Lawgiver therein. That a Law is then understood to be rightly established, when it containeth nothing but what is honest and lawful, and is enacted by such person or persons as have full and sufficient authority to make Laws. That a Law so established continues a Law, and is so in force, till it be either Repealed by as good and lawful Authority, as that by which it was made, or else antiquated by a long continued uninforced disuse with the tacit or presumed consent of the Lawgiver. That the Act printed before the Common Prayer Book, and entitled (An Act for the Uniformity) was such a Law, being it was established in a full and free Parliament in peaceable times, and ratified by the Royal Assent, That it still continues in force, and being not yet Repealed, but by such persons as (at least in the Opinion of those that maintain the Dispute) for want of the Royal Assent, have not a sufficient right or authority to do such an Act, nor disused but of late times, and that by enforcement, and as is presumed, much against the mind of the Lawgiver. That therefore it still retains the power of obliging in part of Conscience; that power being so essential and intrinsecal to every Law, quatenus a Law, that it can in no wise be severed from it.  
And that therefore no Minister publicly officiating in the Church, can with a good Conscience either omit any part of that which is commanded by the aforesaid Law, or use any other Form than what is contained in the foresaid Book, but must either use the Form prescribed in the Book, or else forbear to officiate.   
The Answer to this Objection (granting all in the Premises besides) dependeth upon the right understanding of that which is affirmed concerning the Obligation of the Laws according to the intention of the Lawgiver; 
Answ.  which if it should be understood precisely of that particular, actual, and immediate intention which the Lawgiver had declared by the words of the Law (in which sense only the Objection proceedeth) will not hold true in all cases. But there is supposed besides that, in Lawgiver, a more general, habitual, & ultimate intention of a more excellent and transcendent nature than the former, which is to have an influence into, and overruling power over all particular Laws (viz.) an intention by the Laws to procure and promote the public good. The former intention binds, when it is subservient to the latter, or consistent with it, and consequently bindeth in ordinary cases, and in orderly times, or else the Law is not a wholesome Law. But when the observation of the Law, by reason of the conjuncture of circumstances, or the iniquity of the times (contingencies which no Lawgiver could either certainly foresee, or if foreseen, sufficiently provide against) would rather be prejudicial than advantageous to the Public; or is manifestly attended with such inconveniencies and sad consequents to the Observers, as all the imaginable good that can redound to the Public thereby, cannot in any reasonable measure countervail: In such case the Law obligeth not, but according to the latter and more general intention only; even as in the operations of nature, particular Agents do ordinarily move according to their proper and particular inclinations; yet upon some occasions, and to serve the ends and intentions of universal nature (for the avoiding of some things which nature abhors) they are sometimes carried with motions quite contrary to their particular natures; as the Air to descend, and the Water to ascend for the avoiding of vacuity, etc. The common received Maxim (which hath been sufficiently misapplied, and that sometimes to very ill purposes since the beginning of these unhappy divisions) in the true meaning of it looketh this way, Salus populi suprema Lex: the equity of which Maxim, as it leaveth in the Lawgiver a power of dispensing with the Law (which is a suspending the Obligation thereof for the time in respect of the proper and particular intention) so he shall see it expedient in order to the public good; so it leaveth in the Subject a liberty upon just occasions (as in cases of great exigency, and for the preventing of such hazards and inconveniencies as might prove of noisome consequence to the Public) to do otherwise than the Law requireth. And neither is the exercise of that power in the Lawgiver to be thought an unreasonable Prerogative, nor the use of this liberty in the Subject an unreasonable presumption; inasmuch as the power of dispensing with particular Laws is such a Prerogative, as without which no Commonwealth can be well governed, but Justice would be turned into Gall and Wormwood: Nor can the Supreme Governor, without forfeiture of that faithfulness which he oweth to the Public Weal, divest himself thereof.  
And he that presumeth of the Lawgivers consent to dispense with him for the Observation of the Law in such needful cases (where he hath not the opportunity to consult his pleasure therein) presumeth no more than he hath reason to do. For it may well be presumed that the Lawgiver, who is bound in all his Laws to intend the safety of the Public, and of every member thereof in his due proportion, hath no intention by the strict observation of any particular Law, to oblige any person, who is a Member of the Public, to his destruction or ruin, when the common good is not answerably promoted thereby: Upon which ground it is generally resolved by Casuists▪ That no Constitution (merely humane) can lay such Obligation upon the Conscience of the Subject, but that we may (according to the exigency of circumstances) do otherwise than the Constitution requireth, provided it be done extra casum scandali & contemptûs, i. e. without either bewraying in himself any contempt of the Authority of the Lawgiver by his carriage, or giving any just occasion of scandal to others by his example in so doing.  
I have been somewhat the longer in explaining this point, not only for the better clearing of the present doubt, but also in respect of the usefulness of this consideration for the preventing and removing of many scruples that may happen to conscientious men in such times as these, wherein so many things are (and are like to be) commanded and forbidden contrary to the established Laws, and those (as they are persuaded) yet standing in force. The best rule that I know to guide men in their deliberations and actions in such emergent cases (according to what hath been already delivered) is advisedly and impartially to weigh the benefit & inconveniencies, as well on the one side, as on the other, as they stand in relation unto the Public Good: and if after such examination and comparison made, it shall then evidently (or but in the judgement of probability) appear, that the Observation of the Law, according to the proper intention of the Lawgiver therein, though with hazard of Estate, Liberty, or even life itself, hath a greater tendency to the Public Good, and the preservation of Church or Commonwealth in safety, peace, and order, than the preventing of the foresaid hazards, or other evil consequents, by doing otherwise than the Law requireth, can have; or (which cometh to one) if the violating of the Law shall then appear to be more prejudicial to the Public Good, than the preservation of the Subject's Estate, Liberty, or Life can be beneficial hereunto: In such case the Subject is bound to hazard all he hath, and undergo whatsoever inconveniencies and calamities can ensue thereupon, rather than violate the Law with contempt of that Authority to which he oweth subjection.  
But if it shall (after such comparison made) evidently (or but more probably than the contrary) appear, That that preservation of such a persons Life, Liberty, Estate, would more benefit the Church or Commonwealth, than the punctual observation of the Law at that time, and with those circumstances, would do; it were an unseasonable, unreasonable, and pernicious scrupulosity for such a person to think himself in such a case obliged for the observing of the Law (perhaps but once or twice) with little or no benefit to the Public, to ruin himself, whereby to render himself unuseful and unserviceable to the Public for ever hereafter.  
To bring this Discourse home, and to apply it to the business now under dispute. Suppose we ten, twenty, or One hundred godly Ministers, well affected to the established Liturgy, and actually possessed of Benefices, with the Charge of Souls thereto belonging, should, thinking themselves in Conscience obliged to the use of the whole Form of the Book, as is by the Act appointed, without any addition, omission, or alteration whatsoever (notwithstanding the present conjuncture of Affairs) resolve to use the same accordingly, it would be well considered what the effects and consequents thereof would be.  
Besides other evils, these three are visible, which must all avoidable follow one upon another, if any body shall be found (as doubtless within short time there will be found one or other) to inform and prosecute against them.  
1. The utter undoing of so many worthy persons, fit to do God and his Church good service, together with all those persons that depend upon them for their livelihood, by putting the fruits of their Benefices, wherewith they should buy themselves bread, under Sequestration.  
2. The depriving of those persons of the opportunity of discharging the duties that belong unto them in their Ministerial Calling, in not permitting them, after such Sequestration, to teach or instruct the people belonging to their Charge, or to exercise any thing of their Function publicly in the Church.  
3. The delivering over the Sheep of Christ, that lately were under the hands of the faithful Shepherds, into the Custody of ravenous Wolves, when such Guides shall be set over the several Congregations, as will be sure to mis-teach them one way or other (viz.) either by instilling into them Puritanical and Superstitious Principles, that they may the more securely exercise their Presbyterian Tyranny over their Judgements, Consciences, Persons, and Estates, or else by setting up new Lights before them, to lead them into a maze of Anabaptistical confusion and frenzy.  
These consequents are so heavy to the Sufferers, so certain to ensue upon the use of Common Prayer, and so much without the power of the Lawgivers (in this state of Affairs) either to prevent or remedy, that it is beyond the wit of man what benefit to the Public can accrue by the strict observation of the Act, that may in any proportion countervail these mischiefs. In which case, that man must needs suppose a strange austerity in the Lawgiver, that dares not presume of his consent to disoblige him (for the time) from observing the same. It would be also well considered, Whether he that by his own overnice scrupulosity runs all these hazards, be not (in some measure) guilty of his own undoing, of deserting his station, and of betraying his flock, and do not thereby lose much of that comfort which a Christian Confessor may take in his sufferings, when they are laid upon him by the Hand of God, and not pulled upon himself by his own hands. And more I shall not need to say as to that first Objection.   

Object. 2. Scandal.  
The next thing objected is, 
The danger of the Scandal that others might be ready to take at the Example, who seeing the Law so little regarded by such men (men that have Cure of Souls, and perhaps also of some eminency and esteem in the Church, and whose Example will be much looked upon) will be easily encouraged by this Example to set light by all Authority, and to take the liberty to obey and disobey the Laws of their Sovereign at their pleasure.   
But this Objection, after we are once satisfied concerning the former, need not much trouble us. For,  
1. It seemeth an unreasonable thing in cases of great Exigence (such as we now suppose) that the fear of scandalising our weak Brethren (which is but Debitum charitatis only) should lay upon us a peremptory necessity of observing the Law punctually, whatsoever inconveniencies and mischiefs may ensue thereupon: when the duty of Obedience to our known Governors (which is Debitum justitiae also, and therefore more Obligatory than the other) doth not impose that necessity upon us; as hath been already shown.  
2. Besides, Arguments drawn from Scandal in things neither unlawful nor (setting the reason of Scandal aside) inexpedient, as they are subject to sundry frailties otherwise, so they are manifestly of no weight at all, when they are counterpoised with the apparent danger of evil consequents on the other side. For in such cases there is commonly equal danger (if not rather something more) of Scandal to be taken from the Example the quite contrary way. We may see it in debating the point now in hand: It is alleged on the one side, That by laying aside the use of the Common Prayer, men that are over scrupulous will be encouraged to take a greater liberty in dispensing with the Laws (to the despising both of Laws and Governors) than they ought. And why may it not, by the same reason, be as well alleged on the other side, That by holding up a necessity of using the Common Prayer, men that have tender Consciences may be induced to entertain scruples (to their utter undoing, and to the destruction of their people) when they need not?  
3. But that in the third place, which cometh up home to the business, and taketh off the Objection clearly, is this, That in judging Cases of Scandal, we are not so much to look to the event, what it is, or may be, as to the cause, whence it cometh. For sometimes there is given just cause of Scandal; and yet no Scandal followeth, because it is not taken: Sometimes scandal is taken, and yet no just cause given: and sometimes there is both cause of Scandal given, and Scandal taken thereat. But no man is concerned at any Scandal that happeneth to another by occasion of any thing done by him, neither is chargeable with it farther than he is guilty of having given it. If then we give Scandal to others, and they take it not, the whole guilt is ours, and they are faultless. If we give it, and they take it, we are to bear a share in the blame as they, and that a deep share; (Vae homini, Woe to the man by whom the offence cometh, Matth. 18. 7.) But if they take offence when we give none, it is a thing we cannot help, and therefore the whole blame must lie upon them.  
Wherefore, if at any time any doubt shall arise in that Case of Scandal, How far forth the danger thereof may oblige us to the doing or not doing of any thing proposed; The Resolution will come on much the easier, if we shall but rightly understand what it is to give Scandal, or how many ways a man may become guilty of scandalising another by his Example.  
The ways (as I conceive) are but these four.  
1. When a man doth something before another, which is in itself evil, unlawful, and sinful. In which case, neither the intention of him that doth it, nor the event as to him that seeth it done, is of any consideration: For it matters not whether the doer hath an intention to draw the other into sin, or not; the very matter and substance of the action being evil, and done before others, is sufficient to render the doer guilty of having given Scandal, though neither he had intention himself so to do, nor was any other person actually scandalised thereby: because whatsoever is in its own nature evil, is of itself, and in its own nature scandalous, and of ill Example.  
Thus did Hophni and Phineas▪ the Sons of Eli, 
1 Sam. 2. 17. 22.  give Scandal by their wretched profaneness and greediness about the Sacrifices of the Lord, and their shameless abusing the Women. And so did David also give great Scandal in the matter of Vriah, 2 Sam. 12. 14. Here the Rule is, Do nothing that is evil, for fear of giving Scandal.  
2. The second way is, when a man doth something before another with a direct intention and formal purpose of drawing him thereby to commit sin. In which case neither the matter of the action, nor the event is of any consideration: For it makes no difference as to the sin of giving Scandal, whether any man be effectually enticed to commit sin or not thereby; neither doth it make any difference, whether the thing done were in itself unlawful, or not, so as it had an appearance of evil, and from thence an aptitude to draw another by the doing of that (by imitation) which should be really and intrinsically evil. The wicked intention alone (whatsoever the effect should be, or what means soever should be used to promote it) sufficeth to induce the guilt of giving Scandal upon the doer. This was Ierohoam's sin, in setting up the Calves, with a formal purpose and intention thereby (for his own secular and ambitious ends) to corrupt the purity of Religion, and to draw the people unto Idolatrous Worship. For which cause he is so often stigmatised with it, as a note of Infamy, to stick by him whilst the World lasteth, being scarce ever mentioned in the Scripture, but with this addition, Jeroboam the son of Nebat, which made Israel to sin. Here the Rule is, Do nothing, good or evil, with an intention to give Scandal.  
3. The third way is when a man doth something before another, which in itself is not evil, but indifferent, and so according to the Rule of Christian Liberty, lawful for him to do, or not to do, as he shall see cause (yea, and perhaps otherwise commodious and convenient for him to do) yet whereas he probably forseeth that others will take Scandal, and be occasioned thereby to do evil. In such a case, if the thing to be done be not in some degree prudentially necessary for him to do, but that he might, without very great inconvenience or prejudice to himself or any third person, leave it undone: He is bound in Charity to his Brother's Soul (for whom Christ died) and for the avoiding of Scandal, to abridge himself in the exercise of his Christian Liberty for that time, so far as rather to suffer some inconvenience himself by the not doing of it, than by the doing of it to cause his Brother to offend. The very Case which is so often, so largely, and so earnestly insisted upon by St. Paul. See Rom. 14. 13, 21. Rom. 15. 1, 3. 1 Cor. 8. 7, 13. 1 Cor. 9 12, 15, 19, 22. 1 Cor. 10. 23. 33. Here the Rule is, Do nothing that may be reasonably forborn, whereat Scandal will be taken.  
4. The last way is, when a man doth something before another, which is not only lawful, but (according to the exigencies of present Circumstances) pro hic & nunc very behooveful, and even prudentially necessary for him to do, but forseeth that the other will be like to make an ill use of it, and take encouragement thereby to commit sin, if he be not withal careful, as much as possibly in him lieth, to prevent the Scandal that may be taken thereat: For, Qui non prohibet peccare, cum potest, jubet. In such case the bare neglect of his Brother, and not using his utmost endeavour to prevent the evil that might ensue, maketh him guilty. Upon which consideration standeth the Equity of the Judicial Law given to the Jews, which ordered, 
Exod. 21. 33, 34.  That in case a man dig a Pit for the use of his Family, and looking no farther than his own convenience, put no cover upon it, and leave it open, whereby it happeneth his Neighbour's Beast to fall thereinto and perish, the owner of the Pit is to make it good, inasmuch as he was the occasioner of that loss to his Neighbour, which he might and ought to have prevented. Here the Rule is Order the doing of that, which may not be well left undone, in such sort that no Scandal (so far as you can help it) may be taken thereat.  
To apply this. The thing under debate, viz. the Action proposed to present enquiry is, The laying aside the Common Prayer, being enjoined by Law, and using instead thereof some other Form of Church Service of our own devising. And the Enquiry concerning it is, Whether it may be done with a good Conscience in regard of the Scandal that is given, or at least may be taken thereat, Yea or No?  
Now forasmuch as in this Enquiry we take it for granted, That the thing to be done is not in its own nature simply evil, but rather in this state of affairs prudentially necessary; and that they who make scruple at it upon the point of Scandal, have not the least intention of drawing other of the Laws into contempt, or their Brethren into sin by their Example. It is manifest that three of the now mentioned Cases, with the Rules to each of them appending, are not pertinent to the present Enquiry. But since the last of the four only proveth to be our Case, we have therefore no more to do for the settling of our Judgements, and quieting of our Consciences, and the regulating of our Practice in this Affair, than to consider well what the Rule in this Case given obligeth us unto; which is not to leave the Action undone for the danger of Scandal, which (besides the Inconveniencies formerly mentioned) would but start new Questions, and those beget more to the multiplying unnecessary Scruples in infinitum: But to order the doing of it so, that (if it were possible) no Scandal at all might ensue thereupon, or at least wise not by our default, through our careless or undiscreet managery thereof. Even as the Jew that stood in need to sink a Pit for the service of his House or Ground, was not (for fear his Neighbour's Beast should fall into it, and be drowned) bound by the Law to forbear the making of it, but only to provide a sufficient cover for it, where he had made it. The thing then in this Case is not to be left undone, when it so much behoveth us to do it; but the Action to be carried on (for the manner of doing, and in all respects and circumstances thereunto belonging) with so much chariness and tenderness, moderation and wisdom (to our best understanding) that the necessity of our so doing, with the true cause thereof, may appear to the World, to the satisfaction of those that are willing to take notice of it; and that such persons as would be willing to make use of our Ensample to do the same thing, where there is not the same necessity, may do it upon their own score, and not be able to vouch our practice for their excuse; which how it may be best done for particular directions, every charitable and conscientious man must ask his own discretion. Some general helps thereunto I shall lay down in answering the next Objection, where they would fall in again not improperly, and so stop two Gaps with one Bush.   

Object. 3. Schism.  
The last Objection is that of Shism. The Objectors hold all such persons as have opposed either Liturgy or Church Government, as they were by Law established within this Realm, for no better than Schismatics; and truly I shall not much gainsay it. But then they argue, 
That for them to do the same thing in the public worship of God that Schismatics do (and for doing whereof especially it is that they avow them Schismatics) would (as they conceive) involve them in the Schism also, as partakers thereof in some degree with the other: And their Consciences also would, from Rom. 14. 22. condemn them either of hypocrisy, in allowing that in themselves, and in their own practice, which they condemn in others; or of uncharitableness, in judging others as Schismatics for doing but the same thing which they can allow themselves to practise. For all that such persons, as they call Schismatics, do in this matter of the Church Service, is but to leave out the Church's Prayers, and to put in their own. Or say, this should not make them really guilty of the Schism they so much detest, yet would such their symbolising with them seem at least a kind of unworthy compliance with them, more than could well become the simplicity of a Christian, much less of a Minister of the Gospel, whose duty it is to shun even the least appearance of evil. 
1 Thess. 5.  Besides, that by so doing they should but confirm such men in their Schismatical Principles and Practice.   
This Objection hath 3 Branches. To the first whereof I oppose the old saying, Duo cum faciunt idem, non est idem; which, although spoken quite to another purpose, yet is very capable of such a sense which will very well fit our present purpose also.  
I Answer therefore in short. To do the same thing that Schismatics do (especially in times of Confusion, and till things can be reduced unto better Order, and when men are necessitated thereunto to prevent greater mischiefs) doth not necessarily infer a partaking with them in Schism, no, nor so much as probably, unless it may appear upon probable presumption otherwise, that it is done out of the same Schismatical Spirit, and upon such Schismatical Principles as theirs are.  
The other two Branches (viz. That of seeming compliance with Schismatics, and That of the ill use they make of it to confirm them in their Schism) do upon the matter fall in upon the aforesaid point of Scandal, and are in effect but the same Objection, only put into a new dress, and so have received their Answer already. And the only remedy against both these Fears (as well that of Scandal, as this of Schism) is the same which was there prescribed, Even to give assurance to all men, by our carriage and behaviour therein, that we do not lay aside Common Prayer of our own accord, or out of any dislike thereof, neither in contempt of our rightful Governors, or of the Laws, nor out of any base compliance with the Times, or unworthy Secular own ends, nor out of any Schismatical principles, seditious designs, or innovating humour; but merely enforced thereunto by such a necessity, as we cannot otherwise avoid in order to the Glory of God, and the Public Good, for the preservation of our Families, our Flocks, and our Functions: And that with the good leave and allowance (as we have great reason to believe) of such as have power to dispense with us and the Laws in that behalf.  
This if we shall do bonâ fide, and with our utmost endeavours, in singleness of heart, and with godly discretion, perhaps it will not be enough to prevail with either the censure of inconsiderate and inconsiderable persons, or the ill use that may be made of our Example, through the ignorance or negligence of some (scandalum pusillorum) or through the perverseness and malice of others (scandalum pharisaeorum) as the Schools term them: But assuredly it will be sufficient in the sight of God, and the witness of our own hearts, and to the Consciences of charitable and considering men, to acquit us clear of all guilt, either of Scandal or Schism in the least degree. Which we may probably do by observing these ensuing, or such other like general Directions (The liberty of using such meet accommodations, as the circumstances in particular Cases shall require, evermore allowed and reserved). viz.  
1. If we shall decline the company and society of known Schismatics, not conversing frequently or familiarly with them, or more than the necessary affairs of life, and the rules of Neighbourhood and common civility will require; especially not to give countenance unto their Church Assemblies, by our presence among them, if we can avoid it.  
2. If we shall retain, as well in common discourse, as in our Sermons and holy Offices of the Church, the old Theological and Ecclesiastical terms and forms of Speech, which have been generally received and used in the Churches of Christ, which the people are well acquainted with, and are wholesome and significant, and not follow our new Masters in that uncouth affected garb of Speech, or Canting Language rather (if I may so call it) which they have of late taken up, as the signal distinction and characteristical note of that, which in that their new Language they call The Godly Party, or Communion of Saints.  
3. If in officiating we repeat not only the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, the ten Commandments, and such other passages in the Common Prayer Book, as (being the very words of Scripture) no man can except against; but so much of the old Liturgy besides, in the very words and syllables of the Book, as we think the Ministers of State in those parts wherein we live will suffer, and the Auditory, before whom we officiate, will bear; sith the Officers in all parts of the Land are not alike strict, nor the people in all Parishes alike disaffected in this respect.  
4. If, where we must of necessity vary from the words, we yet follow the Order of the Book in the main parts of the holy Offices, retaining the substance of the Prayers, and embellishing those of our own making, which we substitute into the place of those we leave out, with phrases and passages taken out of the Book in other places.  
5. If, where we cannot safely mention the Particulars mentioned in the Book (as namely in praying for the King, the Queen, the Royal Progeny, and the Bishops) we shall yet use in our Prayers some such general terms, and other intimations devised for that purpose, as may sufficiently convey to the understanding of the people what our intentions are therein, and yet not be sufficient to fetch us within the compass of the Ordinance.  
6. If we shall in our Sermons take occasion now and then, where it may be pertinent, either to discover the weakness of the Puritan Principles and Tenets to the people; or to show out of some passages and expressions in the Common Prayer, the consonancy of those Observations we have raised from the Text, with the Judgement of the Church of England: or to justify such particular passages in the Litany, Collects, and other parts of our Liturgy as have been unjustly quarrelled at by Presbyterians, Independents, Anabaptists, or other (by what Name or Title soever they are called) Puritan Sectaries.   
Thus have I freely acquainted you both with my practice and judgement in the Point proposed in your Friend's Letter. How I shall be able to satisfy his or your judgement in what I have written, I know not; however, I have satisfied both your desire and his in writing, and shall rest Your Brother and Servant in the Lord, Rob. Sanderson.