THE GRAND DEBATE BETWEEN The most Reverend the BISHOPS, AND The PRESBYTERIAN Divines, Appointed by His Sacred MAJESTY, AS COMMISSIONERS FOR The Review and Alteration OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER, etc.  
BEING An Exact Account of their whole Proceedings.  
The most perfect Copy.  
London, Printed 1661.   

A Copy of His Majesty's Commission.  
CHARLES' the second by the Grace of God King of England, Scotland, France & Ireland, Defender of the Faith, etc. To our Trusty and well-beloved, the most Reverend Father in God, Accepted Archbishop of York, The right reverend Fathers in God, Gilbert Bishop of London, John Bishop of Durham, John Bishop of Rochester, Humphrey Bishop of Sarum, George Bishop of Worcester, Robert Bishop of Lincoln, Benjamin Bishop of Peterborough, Brian Bishop of Chester, Richard Bishop of Carlisle, John Bishop of Exeter, Edward Bishop of Norwich, & to our trusty and well-beloved, the Reverend Anthony Tuckney D. D. John Conant D. D. William Spurstow D. D. John Wallis D. D. Thomas Manton, D. D. Edmund Calamy B. D. Richard Baxter Clerk, Arthur Juckson, Tho. Case, Samuel Clarke, Matthew Newcomen, Clerks; and to our trusty and well-beloved Dr. Earl Dean of Westminster, Peter Heylin, D. D. Joh. Hacket, D. D. Joh. Berwick D. D. Peter Gunning D. D. John Pearson D. D. Tho. Pierce D. D. Anthony Sparrow, Herbert Thorndike D. D. Thomas Horton D. D. Thomas Jacomb, D. D. William Bate, John Rawlinson, William Cooper, Clerks, D. John Light- foot, D. John Collings, D. Benjamin Woodbridg; and William Drake Clerk, Greeting. Whereas by our Declaration of the 25 of October last concerning Ecclesiastical affairs, we did (amongst other things) express our esteem of the Liturgy of the Church of England, contained in the Book of Common prayer; and yet since we find exceptions made against several things therein, we did by our said Declaration declare we would appoint an equal number of learned Divines, of both persuasions, to review the same: we therefore in accomplishment of our said will and intent, and of our continued and constant care and study for the peace and unity of the Churches within our dominions, & for removal of all exceptions and differences, and the occasions of such differences, and exceptions from among our good subjects, for or concerning the said Book of Common prayer, or any thing therein contained, do by these our Letters patents require, authorise, constitute, and appoint you the said, etc. to advise upon and review the said Book of Common prayer, comparing the same with the most ancient Liturgies which have been used in the Church in the primitive and purest times. And to that end to assemble and meet together, from time to time, and at such time within the space of four Calendar months now next ensuing, in the Master's lodging in the Savoy in the Strand in the County of Middlesex, or in such other place or places as to you shall be thought fit and convenient, to take into your serious and grave considerations the several directions and rules, forms of prayer, and things in the said Book of Common prayer contained, and to advise, consult upon, and about the same, and the several objections and exceptions, which shall now be raised against the same, and (if occasion be) to make such reasonable and necessary alterations, corrections and amendments therein as by and between you the said Archbishop, Bishops, Doctors, and Persons hereby required and authorized to meet and advise as aforesaid, shall be agreed upon to be needful and expedient, for the giving satisfaction to tender consciences, and the restoring and continuance of peace and unity in the Churches under our protection and Government; but avoiding (as much as may be) all unnecessary abreviations of the Forms and Liturgy wherewith the people are altogether acquainted, and have so long received in the Church of England. And our will and pleasure is, that when you the said Archbishop, Bishops, Doctors, and persons authorized and appointed by these our Letters patents to meet, advise, and consult upon and about the premises, as aforesaid, shall have drawn your consultations to any resolution and determination which you shall agree upon as needful or expedient to be done for the altering, diminishing, or enlarging, the said Book of Common prayer, or any part thereof, that then forthwith you certify and present to us in writing under your several hands the matters and things whereupon you shall so determine, for our approbation, and to the end the same or so much thereof as shall be approved by us, may be established, and for as much as the said Archbishop & Bishops have several great Charges to attend, which we would not dispense with, or that the same should be neglected upon any great occasion whatsoever, and some of them being of great age and infirmities, may not be able constantly to attend the execution of the service and authority hereby given and required by us, in the meeting and consultation aforesaid; We will therefore and hereby require you the said Dr. Earls, etc. to supply the place and places of such of the Archbishop and Bishops (other than the said Edward Bishop of Norwich) as shall by age, sickness, infirmity, or other occasion be hindered from attending the said meeting or consultation (that is to say) that one of you the said Dr. Earls, etc. shall from time to time supply the place of each one of them, the said Archbishop and Bishops (other than the said Edward Bishop of Norwich) which shall happen to be hindered or to be absent from the said meetings, or consultations, and shall and may advise, consult and determine, and also certify and execute all and singular the powers and authorities before mentioned in and about the premises, as fully and absolutely as such Archbishop and Bishops which shall so happen to be absent should or might do by virtue of these our Letters patents, or any thing herein contained, in case he or they were personally present. And whereas in regard of the distance of some, the infirmity of others, the multitude of constant employment, and other incidental impediments, some of you the said Edward Bishop of Norwich, etc. may be hindered from the constant attendance in the execution of the service aforesaid, We therefore will and do hereby require and authorise you the said Thomas Horton, etc. to supply the place or places of such the Commissioners last before mentioned, as shall by the means aforesaid or any other occasion be hindered from the said meeting and consultations that one of you, the said Thomas Horton, etc. shall from time to time supply the places of each one of the said Commissioners last mentioned, which shall happen to be hindered or absent from the said meeting and consultations: and shall and may advise consult and determine, and also certify and execute all and singular the powers and authorities before mentioned in and about the premises as fully and absolutely as such of the said last mentioned Commissioners, which shall so happen to be absent, should or might do by virtue of these our Letters patents or any thing therein contained, in case he or they were personally present. In witness whereof we have caused these our Letters to be made patents, witness ourselves at Westminster the 25 day of March in the thirteenth year of our Reign.  
Per ipsum Regem. Barker.   

THE EXCEPTIONS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN- Brethren, Against some passages in the present LITURGY.  
ACknowledging, with all humility and thankfulness, His Majesty's most Princely condescension and indulgence to very many of his Loyal subjects, as well in his Majesty's most gracious Declaration, as particularly in this present Commission issued forth in pursuance thereof; we doubt not but the Right Reverend Bishops, and all the rest of His Majesty's Commissioners entrusted in this work, will in imitation of His Majesty's most prudent and Christian Moderation and Clemency, judge it their duty (that we find to be the Apostles own practice) in a special manner to be tender to the Church's peace, to bear with the infirmities of the weak, and not to please themselves, nor to measure the Consciences of other men by the light and latitude of their own, but seriously and readily to consider, and advise of such Expedients as may most conduce to the healing of our breaches, and uniting those that differ.  
And albeit we have an high and honourable esteem of those Godly and Learned Bishops, and others, who were the first Compilers of the public Liturgy, and do look upon it as an excellent and worthy Work, for that time, when the Church of England made her first step out of such a mist of Popish Ignorance and Superstition, wherein it formerly was involved; yet considering, that all humane Works do gradually arrive at their maturity and perfection, and this in particular being a Work of that nature, hath already admitted several emendations since the first compiling thereof, It cannot be thought any disparagement, or derogation either to the Work itself, or to the Compilers of it, or to those who have hitherto used it, if after more than one hundred years since its first composure such further emendations be now made therein, as may be judged necessary for satisfying the scruples of a multitude of sober persons, who cannot at all (or very hardly) comply with the use of it as now it is, and may best suit with the present times, after so long an enjoyment of the glorious light of the Gospel, and so happy a Reformations especially considering that many godly and learned men, have from the beginning all along desired the alteration of many things therein, and very many of his Majesty's pious peaceable and loyal Subjects, after so long a discontinuance of it, are more averse from it than heretofore; the satisfying of whom (as far as may be) will very much conduce to that Peace and Unity which is so much desired by all good men, and so much endeavoured by His most Excellent Majesty.  
And therefore in pursuance of this His Majesty's most gracious Commission for the satisfying of tender Consciences, and the procuring of Peace and Unity amongst ourselves, we judge meet to propose,  
I. That all the Prayers, and other Materials of the Liturgy, may consist of nothing doubtful or questioned amongst Pious, Learned and Orthodox Persons, inasmuch as the professed end of composing them is, for the declaring of Unity and consent of all who join in the Public Worship, it being too evident, that the limiting Church-Communion to things of doubtful disputation, hath been in all Ages the ground of Schism and separation, according to the saying of a Learned Man.  
To load our Public Forms with the private Fancies upon which we differ, is the most Sovereign way to perpetuate Schism to the World's end. Prayer, Confession, Thanksgiving, reading of the Scriptures, and administration of the Sacraments in the plainest and simplest manner were matter enough to furnish out a sufficient Liturgy, though nothing either of private Opinion, or of Church pomp, of Garments, or prescribed Gestures, of Imagery, of Music, of matter concerning the dead, of many superfluities which creep into the Church under the name of Order and Decency did interpose itself. To charge Churches or Litnrgies with things unnecessary was the first beginning of all Superstition; and when scruple of Conscience began to be made, or pretended, than Schism began to break in. If the special Guides and Fathers of the Church would be a little sparing of encumbering Churches with Superfluities, or not overrigid, either in reviving obsolete Customs, or imposing new, there would be far less cause of Schism, or Superstition, and all the Inconvenience likely to ensue would be but this; they should in so doing yield a little to the imbecility of their Inferiors, a thing which S. Paul would never have rrefused to do, mean while, wheresoever false or suspected Opinions are made a piece of Church-Liturgy, he that separates is not the Schismatic; for, it is alike unlawful to make profession of known or suspected falsehood, as to put in practice unlawful or suspected actions.  
II. Further, we humbly desire, that it may be seriously considered, that as our first Reformers out of their great wisdom did at that time so compose the Liturgy as to win upon the Papists, and to draw them into their Church-Communion, by varying as little as well they could from the Romish forms before in use; so whether in the present constitution and state of things amongst us we should not according to the same rule of Prudence and Charity have our Liturgy so composed, as to gain upon the judgement and affections of all those who in the substantials of the Protestant Religion are of the same persuasions with ourselves. In as much as a more firm union and consent of all such, as well in Woship as in Doctrine, would greatly strengthen the Protestant Interest against all those dangers and temptations which our intestine Divisions and Animosities do expose us unto from the common Adversary.  
III. That the Repetitions and Responsals of the Clerk and People, and the alternate Reading of the Psalms and Hymns with a confused murmur in the Congregation, whereby what is read is less intelligible, and therefore unedifying, may be omitted, the Minister being appointed for the People in all Public Services appertaining unto God, and the holy Scriptures both of the old and new Testament, intimating the people's part in public Prayer, to be only with silence and reverence, to attend thereunto, and to declare their consent in the close, by saying, Amon.  
IV. That in regard the Litany (though otherwise containing in it many holy Petitions) is so framed, that the Petitions, for a great part, are uttered only by the People, which we think not to be so consonant to Scripture, which makes the Minister the Mouth of the People to God in Prayer, the particulars thereof may be composed into one solemn Prayer to be offered by the Minister unto God for the People.  
V. That there may be nothing in the Liturgy which may seem to countenance the observation of Lent, as a Religious Fast, the Example of Christ's fasting forty days and nights being no more imitable, nor intended for the imitation of Christians, than any other of his miraculous works were, or than Moses his forty days Fast was for the Jews, and the Act of Parliament 5 Eliz. forbidding abstinence from flesh to be observed upon any other than a politic Consideration, and punishing all those who by Preaching, Teaching, Writing, or open Speech shall notify, that the forbearing of flesh is of any necessity for the saving of the soul, or that it is the service of God otherwise than as other politic Laws are.  
VI That the Religious observation of Saints days appointed to be kept as holy days and the Vigils thereof, without any foundations (as we conceive) in Scripture, may be omitted, that if any be retained they may be called Festival, and not Holy days, nor made equal with the Lords day, nor have any peculiar Service appointed for them, nor that the People be upon such days enforced wholly to abstain from work; and that the names of all others not inserted in the calendar, which are not in the first and second Books of Edward the Sixth, may be left out.  
VII. That the gift of Prayer being one special qualification for the Work of the Ministry bestowed by Christ in order to the edification of his Church, and to be exercised for the profit and benefit thereof according to its various and emergent necessities.  
It is desired that there may be no such Imposition of the Liturgy, as that the exercise of that gift be thereby totally excluded in any part of public worship; and further, that considering the great age of some Ministers, and the infirmities of others, and the variety of several services oft time occurring upon the same day, whereby it may be inexpedient to require every Minister at all times to read the whole; it may be left to the discretion of the Minister to omit it, as occasion shall require, which liberty we find to be allowed even in the first Common Prayer Book of Edward the Sixth.  
VIII. That in regard of the many defects which have been observed in that Version of the Scriptures which is used throughout the Liturgy, (many fold instances whereof may be produced) as in the Epistle for the first Sunday after Epiphany, taken out of Rom. 12. 1. Be you changed in your shape. And the Epistle for the Sunday next before Easter, taken out of Phil. 2. 5. Found in his apparel as a man; As also the Epistle for the first Sunday in Lent, taken out of the fourth of the Galatians, Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia, and bordereth upon the City which is now called Jerusalem. The Epistle for Saint Matthews day being taken out of the second Epistle of the Corinthians and the fourth, We go not out of kind. The Gospel for the second Sunday after Epiphany, taken out of the second of John, When men be drunk. The Gospel for the third Sunday in Lent, taken out of the eleventh of Luke, One house doth fall upon another. The Gospel for the Annunciation, taken out of the first of Luke, This is the sixth month which is called Barren, and many other places; we therefore desire instead thereof the Translation allowed of by Authority may alone be used.  
IX. That in as much as the Holy Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation to furnish us thoroughly unto all good works, and contain in them all things necessary either in Doctrine to be believed, or in Duty to be practised; whereas divers Chapters of the Apocryphal Books appointed to be read, are charged to be in both respects of dubious and uncertain credit: It is therefore desired that nothing be read in the Church for Lessons, but the Holy Scriptures in the Old and New Testament.  
X. That the Minister be not required to rehearse any part of the Liturgy at the Communion Table, save only those parts which properly belong to the Lords Supper, and that at such time only when the Holy Supper is administrated.  
XI. That the word (Minister) and not (Priest) or (Curate) is used in the absolution, and in divers other places; It may throughout the whole Book be used instead of those two words, and that instead of the word (Sunday) the word (Lords day) may be every where used.  
XII. Because singing of Psalms is a considerable part of Public Worship, we desire that the Version set forth and allowed to be sung in Churches may be amended, or that we may have leave to make use of a purer Version.  
XIII. That all obsolete words in the Common Prayer, and such whose use is changed from their first significancy (as read who smote thee) used in the Gospels for the Monday and Wednesday before Easter (Than opened be their wits) used in the Gospel for Easter Tuesday, etc. may be altered into other words generally received, and better understood.  
XIV. That no portions of the Old Testament, or the Acts of the Apostles be called Epistles; or read as such.  
XV. That whereas throughout the several offices the Phrase is such as presumes all persons (within the Communion of the Church) to be regenerated, converted, and in an actual state of grace, which had Ecclesiastical Discipline been truly and vigorously executed in the exclusion of scandalous and obstinate sinners might be better supposed; But that there having been, and still being a confessed want of that (as in the Liturgy is acknowledged) it cannot rationally be admitted in the utmost latitude of Charity: we desire that this may be reform.  
XVI. That whereas orderly connexion of Prayers and of particular Petitions and expressions, together with a competent length of the forms used, are tending much to edification, and to gain the reverence of people to them: There appears to us too great neglect of this Order, and of other Just Laws of method particularly.  
1. The Collects are generally short, many of them consisting but of one or two Sentences of petition, and those generally usherd in with a repeated mention of the Name and Attributes of God, and presently concluding with the Name and Merits of Christ whence are caused many unnecessary intercessions and abruptions, which when many Petitions are to be offered at the same time, are neither agreeable to scriptural example, nor suited to the gravity and seriousness of that Holy Duty.  
2. The Prefaces of many Collects have not any clear and special respect to the following Petitions; and particular petitions are put together, which have not any due order or evident connexion one with another, nor suitable with the occasions upon which they are used, but seem to have fallen in rather casually, than from any orderly codtinuance.  
It is desired that instead of these various Collects, there may be one Methodical and entire form of Prayer composed out of many of them.  
XVII. That whereas the Puplick Liturgy of a Church should in reason comprehend the sum of all such sins as are ordinarily in Prayer by the Church to be confessed, and of such Petitions and Thanksgiving as are ordinarily by the Church to be put up to God, and that Puplick Catechisms or Systemes of Doctrine should summarily comprehend all such Doctrines as are necessarily to be believed, and these explicitly set down. The present Liturgy, as to all these seems very defective particularly:  
1. There is no preparatory Prayer in your addresses to God for assistance or acceptance; yet many Collects in the midst of the Worship have little or nothing else.  
2. The Confession is very defective, not clearly expressing Original sin, nor sufficiently enumerating Actual sins with their aggrivations, but consisting only of generals, whereas Confession being the exercise of repentance ought to be more particular.  
3. There is also great defect, as to such Forms of public prayers and thanksgivings as are suitable to Gospel-worship.  
4. The whole body of the Common Prayer also consisteth very much of mere generals, as to have our prayers heard, to be kept from all evil, and from all enemies and all adversities, that we may do Gods will without any mention of the particulars wherein these generals exist.  
5. The Catechism is defective as to many necessary Doctrines of our religion, some even of the Essentials of Christianity not mentioned, except in the Creed, and there not so explicit as aught to be in the Catechism.  
XVIII. Because this Liturgy containeth the imposition of divers Ceremonies, which from the first Reformation have by sundry Learned and pious men been judged unwarrantable: as,  
1. That public Worship may not be celebrated by any Minister that dares not wear a Surplice.  
2. That none may Baptism, or be Baptised without the transient Image of the Cross, which hath at least the semblance of a Sacrament of humane institution, being used as an engaging sign in our first and solemn Covenanting with Christ, and the Duties whereunto we are really obliged by Baptism, being more expressly affixed to that Airy fign than to the holy Sacrament.  
3. That none may receive the Lords Supper that dares not kneel in the act of receiving, but the Minister must exclude all such from the Communion, although such kneeling not only differs from the practice of Christ and of his Apostles; but (at least on the Lords days) is contrry to the practice of the Catholic Church for many hundred years after, and forbid by the most venerable Councila that ever were in the Christian world. All which Impositions are made yet more grievous by that subscription to their lawfulness, which the Cannon exacts, and by the heavy punishments, upon the non observance of them, which the Act for uniformity inflicts.  
And it being doubtful, whether God hath given power unto men to institute in his worship such mystical teaching signs, which not being necessary in genere, fall not under the rule of doing all things decently, orderly, and to edification, and which once granted, will upon the same reason open a door to the arbitrary Imposition of numerous Ceremonies of which St. Aug. complained in his days, and the things in Controversy being in the Judgement of the Imposers confessed indifferent, who dare not so much as pretend any real goodness in themselves, otherwise than what is derived from their being imposed, and consesequently the Imposition ceasing, that will cease also, and the Worship of God not become indecent without them; whereas on the other hand in the Judgement of the Opposers, they are by some held sinful and unlawful in themselves, by others very inconvenient and unsuitable to the simplicity of Gospel-Worship, and by all of them very grievous and burdensome, and therefore not at all fit to put in balance with the peace of the Church, which is more likely to be promoted by their removal than continuance, considering also how tender our Lord and Saviour himself is of weak Brethren, declaring it to be much better for a man to have a Millstone to be hanged about his neck, and to be cast into the depth of the Sea, than to offend one of his little ones, and how the Apostle Paul (who had as great a Legislative power in the Church as any under Christ) held himself obliged by that common rule of Charity, not to lay a stumbling block, or an occasion of offence before a weak Brother, choosing rather not to cat flesh while the world stands (though in itself a thing lawful) than offend his Brother, for whom Christ died; we cannot but desire that these Ceremonies may not be imposed on them who judge such impositions a violation of the Royalty of Christ, and an Impeachment of his Laws as insufficient, and are under the holy Law of that which is written, Deut. 12. 32. What thing soever I command you, observe to do it, thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it; but that there may be either a total abolishion of them, or at least such a liberty, that those who are unsatisfied concerning their lawfulness, or expedency, may not be compolled to the practice of them or subscription to them; but may be permitted to enjoy their Ministerial Functions and Communion with the Church without them.  
The rather because these Ceremonies have for above an hundred years been the fountain of manifold evils in this Church and Nation, occasioning sad Divisions between Ministers and Ministers, and also between Ministers and people, exposing many orthodox, pious, and peaceable Ministers to the displeasure of their Rulers, casting them upon the edge of the penal Statutes, to the loss not only of their Livings and liberties, but also of their opportunities for the service of Christ and his Church, and forcing people either to worship God in such a manner as their own consciences condemn, or doubt of, or else to forsake our Assemblies, as thousands have done, and no better fruits than these can be looked for from the retaining and imposing these Ceremonies. unless we could presume that all his Majesty's Subjects should have the same subtlety of Judgement to discern even to a Ceremony how far the Power extends in the things of God. which is not to be expected, or should yield obedience to all the Impositions of men concerning them, without enquiring into the will of God, which is not to be desired.  
We do therefore most earnestly entreat the Right Reverend Fathers and Brethren, to whom these Papers are delivered, as they tender the Glory of God, the Honour of Religion, the Peace of the Church, the Service of His Majesty in the accomplishment of that happy Union which his Majesty hath so abundantly testified his desires of, to join with us in importuning His most Excellent Majesty that His most gracious Indulgence, as to these Ceremonies granted in His Royal Declaration, may be comfirmed and continued to us, and our posterities, and extended to such as do not yet enjoy the benefit thereof.  
XIX. As to that Passage in His Majesty's Commission, wherein we are authorized and required to compare the Present Liturgy with the most ancient Liturgy, which have been used in the Church in the purest and most Primitive Times; we have in obedience to His Majesty's Commission made Inquiry, but cannot find any Records of known Credit concerning any entire Forms of Liturgies within the first 300 years, which are confessed to be as the most Primitive, so the purest Ages of the Church; nor any Imposition of Liturgies upon any National Church; for some hundred years after we find indeed Liturgical Forms fathered upon St. Basil, St. chrysostom, and St. Ambrose; but we have not seen any Copies of them, but such as give us sufficient evidence to conclude them either wholly spurious, or so interpolated, that we cannot make a Judgement what in them hath any Primitive Authority.  
Having thus in general expressed our desire, we come to particulars, which we find numerous, and of a various nature; some we grant are of an inferior consideration, verbal rather than material, which were they not in she Public Liturgy of so Famous a Church, we should not have mentioned; others dubions and disputable, as not having a clear foundation in Scripture for their warrant; but some there be that seem to be corrupt, and to carry in them a repugnancy to the rule of the Gospel, and therefore have administered just matter of exception and offence to many truly religious and peaceable, not of a private station only, but Learned & Judicious Divines, aswel of other Reformed Churches, as of the Church of England, ever since the Reformation.  
We know much hath been spoken and written by way of Apology in answer to many things that have been objected, but yet the doubts and scuples of tender consciences still continue, or rather are increased: We do therefore humbly conceive it therefore a Work worthy of those Wonders of Salvation which God hath wrought for his Majesty, now on the Throne, and for the whole Kingdom, and exceedingly becoming the Ministers of the Gospel of Peace, with all holy moderation and tenderness to endeavour the removal of every thing out of the Worship of God, which may justly offend or grieve the spirits of sober and godly people; the things themselves that we desire to be removed, not being of the foundation of Religion, nor the Essentials of Public Worship, nor the removal of them any way tending to the prejudice of the Church or State; therefore their continuance and rigorous Imposition can no ways be able to countervail the laying aside of so many pious and able Ministers, and the unconceivable grief that will arise to multitudes of His Majesty's most Loyal and peaceable Subjects, who upon all accasions are ready to serve him with their Prayers, Estates, and Lives: For the preventing of which evils, we humbly desire that these particulars following may be taken into serious and tender consideration.  

Concerning Morning and Evening Prayer.  
1. Rub. That Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in the accustomed place of the Church, Chancel, or Chapel, except it shall be otherwise determined by the Ordinary of the Place, and the Chancel shall remain as in times past.  
We desire that the words of the first Rub. may be expressed, as in the Book established by Authority of Parliament 5 & 6 Edwardi 6. thus; The Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used in such place of the Church, Chappel, or Chancel, and the Minister shall so turn himself, as the people may best hear; and if there be any controversies therein, the matter shall be referred to the Ordinary.  
2. Rub. And here it is to be noted, that the Minister at the time of the Cimmunion, and at other times in his ministration, shall use such Ornaments in the Church as were in use by Authority of Parliament, in the second year of the Reign of Edward the Sixth, according to the Act of Parliament, etc.  
For as much as the Rubric seemeth to bring back the Cope, Albe, and other vestments, forbidden in the Common Prayer Book, 5. 6. of Edw. 6. And for the reasons alleged against Ceremonies under our 18. general Exception, we desire it may be wholly left out.  
The Lord's Prayer after the Absolution ends thus: Deliver us from evil.  
We desire that these Words, For thine is the Kingdom, the Power and the Glory, for ever and ever, Amen, may be always added unto the Lord's Prayer, and that this Prayer may not be enjoined to be so often used in the Morning and Evening Service.  
And at the end of every Psalm throughout the year, and likewise in the end of the Benedictus. Benedicite magnificat, etc. Nunc Dimittis, shall be repeated, Glory be to the Father, etc.  
By this Rubric, and other places in the Common Prayer Book the Gloria Patri is appointed to be said six times ordinarily in every Morning and Evening Services, frequently eight times in a Morning, sometimes ten, which we think carries with it at least an appearance of that vain repetition which Christ forbids; for the avoiding of which appearance of evil, we desire it may be used but once in the Morning, and once in the Evening.  
Rubr. In such places where they do sing, there shall the Lessons be sung in a plain Tune, and likewise the Epistle and Gospel. Or this Canticle, Benedicite omnia opera.  
Except. The Lessons, and the Epistles, and Gospels, being for the most part neither Psalms nor Hymns; we know no warrant why they should be sung in any place, and conceive that the distinct reading of them with an audible voice, tends more to the edification of the Church: We desire that some Psalm or Scripture Hymn may be appointed instead of that Apocryphal.  
In the Litany; From fornication, and other deadly sins.  
Except. In regard that the wages of sin is death; we desire that this clause may be thus altered. From fornication and all other beynous (or grievous) sins.  
From battle and murder, and from sudden death.  
Except. Because this expression (of sudden death) hath been so often excepted against; we desire (if it be thought fit) it may be thus read: From battle and murder, and from dying suddenly and unprepared.  
That it may please thee to preserve all that travel by land and by water, all women labouring with child, all sick persons and young Children, and to show thy pity upon all prisoners and captives.  
We desire that the term All, may be advised upon as seeming liable to just exceptions, and that it may be considered whether 
Excep.  it may not better be put indefinitely, those that travel, etc. rather then universally.  

The Collect of Christmas day.  
Almighty God which best given us thy only begotten son to take our nature upon him, and this day to be born of a pure Virgin, &c:   

The Rubric.  
Then shall follow the collect of the Nativity which shall be said continually unto New-years-day.   

The Collect for Whitsunday.  
God which upon this day, etc.  
We desire that in both collects the words (this day) may be 
Excep.  left out, it being according to vulgar acceptation a contradiction.   

Rubric.  
The same Collect to be read on Monday and Tuesday in Whitsun - week.  
The two Collects for St. John's and Innocents', the Collects for the first day in Lent, for the fourth Sunday after Easter, for Trinity Sunday, for the sixth and twelfth sunday after Trinity, for St. Luke's day and Michaelmas day.  
We desire that these Collects may be further considered and debated, as having in them divers things that we judge fit to be 
Excep.  altered.   

The Order for the Administration of the Lords Supper.  
SO many as intend to be partakers of the holy Communion shall signify their Name to the Curate over night, or else in the morning 
Rub.  before the beginning of morning Prayer.  
The time here assigned for notice to be given to the Minister is not sufficient. 
Excep.   
And if any of these be an open and notorious evil liver, the Curate having knowledge thereof, shall call him and advertise him in any 
Rub.  wise not to presume to come to the Lords Table.  
We desire the Minister's power both to admit and keep from 
Excep.  the Lords Table, may be according to his Majesty's Declaration of the 25. Octob. 1660. in these words, The Minister shall admit none to the Lords Supper till they have made a credible profession of their faith, and promised obedience to the will of God, according as is expressed in the consideration of the Rubric before the Catechism; and that all possible diligence be used as is for the instruction and reformation of seandalous offenders, whom the Minister shall not suffer to partake of the Lords table, until they have openly declared themselves to have truly repent and amended their former naughty lives, as is partly expressed in the Rubric, and more fully in the Cannons.  
Then shall the Priest rehearse distinctly all the ten Commandments, 
Rub.  and the people kneeling shall after every Commandment ask God mercy for transgressing the same.  
We desire,  
First, that the Preface prefixed by God himself to the ten 
Excep:  Commandments may be restored.  
Secondly, that the fourth Commandment may be read, as in Exodus 20. Deut. 5. He blessed the Sabbath day.  
Thirdly, that neither Minister nor People may be enjoined to kneel more at the reading of this, then of any other parts of Scripture: The rather because many ignorant persons are thereby induced to use the ten Commandments as a prayer.  
Fourthly, that instead of those short prayers of the people intermixed with the several Commandments, the Minister after the reading of all may conclude with a suitable Prayer.  
After the Creed, if there be no sermon, she'll follow one of the Homilies already set forth, or hereafter to be set forth by common authority 
Rub.   
We desire that the preaching of the Word may be strictly enjoined, and not left so indifferent at the administration of the 
Excep.  Sacrament, as also that Ministers may not be bound to those things which are as yet but future, and not in being.  
After the Sermon, Homily, or Exhortation, the Curate shall declare, 
Rub.  etc. and earnestly exhort them to remember the poor, saying one or more of these sentences following.  
Two of the sentences here cited are Apocryphal, and four of them more proper to draw out their people's bounty to their Minister, 
Excep.  than their charity to the poor.  
Then shall the Churchwardens, or some other by them appointed 
Rub.  gather the Devetion of the people.  
Collection for the poor may be better made at or a little before 
Excep.  the departing of the Communicants.  
We be come together at this time to feed at the Lords Supper, to the 
Rub.  which in God's behalf I bid you all that be here present, and beseech you for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, that you will not refuse to come.  
If it be intended that these Exhortations should be read at the 
Excep.  Communion, they seem to us unreasonable.  
The way and means thereto is, first to examine our lives, & conversations, and if ye shall perceive your offences to be such as be not 
2. Exhor  only against God, but also against our neighbours, than you shall reconcile yourselves unto them, and be ready to make restitution and satisfaction. And because it is requisite that no man should come to the holy Communion, but with a full trust in God's mercy, and with 
3. Exhor  a quiet conscience.  
We fear this may discourage many from coming to the Sacrament who lie under a doubting and troubled conscience. 
Excep.   
Then shall this general confession be made in the name of all those 
Rub. before the Confession.  that are minded to receive the holy Communion, either by one of them or by one of the Ministers, or by the Priest himself.  
We desire it may be made by the Minister only.  
Then shall the Priest or the Bishop being present stand up, and turning 
Excep. Rub.  himself to the people, say thus.  
The Ministers turning himself to the people is most convenient throughout the whole ministration. 
Excep.   
Before the Prefaces on Christmas day and seven days after.  
Because thou didst give Jesus Christ thine only Son to be born as this 
Rub.  day for us, etc.  
First, we cannot peremptorily fix the Nativity of our Saviour 
Excep.  to this or that particular day. Secondly, it seems incongruous to affirm the birth of Christ, and the descending of the holy Ghost to be on this day, for seven or eight days together:  
Upon Whitsunday and six days after.  
According to whose most true promise the Holy ghost came down 
Prayer before that which is at the Consecration. Excep.  this day from Heaven; grant us that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body and our soul washed by his most precious blood.  
We desire that whereas these words seem to give a greater efficacy to the blood then to the Body of Christ, may be altered thus, That our sinful souls and bodies may be cleansed through his precious body and blood.  
Prayer at the consecration.  
Hear us O merciful father, etc. who in the same night that he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and gave it to his Disciples, saying, take, eat, etc.  
We conceive that the manner of consecrating of the Elements is not here explicit and distinct enough: And the Ministers 
Excep.  breaking of the bread is not so much as mentioned.  
Then shall the Minister first receive the Communion in both kinds, 
Rub.  etc. and after deliver it to the people in their hands kneeling; and when he delivereth the bread, he shall say, The body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life, and take, and eat this in remembrance, etc.  
We desire that at the distribution of the Bread & Wine to the Communicants we may use the words of our Saviour as near as 
Excep.  may be, and that the Minister be not required to deliver the bread & wine into every particular Communicants hand, and to repeat the words to eachone in the singular number, but that it may suffice to speak them to divers jointly, according to our Saviour's example. We also desire that kneeling at the Sacrament (it not being the gesture which the Apostles used, though Christ was personally present amongst them, nor that which was used in the purest and primitive times of the Church) may be left free, as it was 1 & 2 Ea. 6. As touching Kneeling, etc. they may be used or left, as every man's devotion serveth, without blame.  
And note, That every Parishioner shall communicate, at the least, three times in the year, of which Easter shall be one; and after shall 
Rub,  receive the Sacraments, and other Rites, according to the Orders in this book appointed.  
Forasmuch as all Parishioners are not duly qualified for the Lords Supper; and those habitually prepared, are not at all 
Excep.  times actually disposed, but may be hindered by the providence of God, and some by the distempers of their own spirits; We desire this Rubric may be wholly omitted▪ or they altered. Every Minister shall be bound to administer the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, at the least, thrice a year: provided there be a due number of Communicants manifesting their desires to receive.  
And we desire that the following Rubric in the Common-Prayer-Book in 5 & 6 Ed. 6. established by Law as much as any other part of the Common-Prayer-Book, may be restored for the Vindication of our Church in the matter of kneeling at the Sacrament (although the gesture be left in different) (Although no order can be so perfectly devised, but it may be of some, either for their ignorance and infirmity, or else of malice and obstinacy misconstrued and depraved, and interpreted in a wrong part. And yet because that brotherly Charity willeth, that (so much as conveniently may be) offences should be taken away; Therefore we willing to do the same whereas it is ordered in the Book of Common-Prayer in the administration of the Lords Supper, that the communicants kneeling should receive the Holy Communion; which thing being well meant for the signification of the humble and grateful acknowledgement of the benefit of Christ given to the worthy Receivers, and to avoid the profanation and disorder, which about the Holy Communion might else ensue) lest yet the same kneeling might be thought, or taken otherwise: We do declare that it is not meant thereby, that any Adoration is done, or aught to be done, either unto the Sacramental Bread or Wine, there bodily received, or unto any real and essential presence there being of Christ's natural flesh and blood, forasmuch as concerning the Sacramental Bread and Wine they remain still in their very natural substance, and therefore may not be adored; for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians: And as concerning the natural body and blood of our Saviour Christ, they are in Heaven, and not here; for it is against the truth of Christ's natural body to be in more places than in one at one time.   

Of Public Baptism.  
THere being divers learned, pious and peaceable Ministers, who do not only judge it unlawful to baptise children, whose Parents both of them are Atheists, Infidels, Heretics, or unbaptised; but also such, whose parents are excommunicate persons; Fornieators, or otherwise notorious and scandalous sinners. We desire they may not be enforced to Baptise the children of such, until they have made open profession of their repentance before Baptism.  
Parents shall give notice over night, or else in the morning.  
We desire that more timely notice may be given. 
Rub. Excep.   
And then the Godfathers and the Godmothers, and the people with their Children,  
Here is no mention of the Parents in whose right the child is baptised, and who are fittest both to dedicate it to God, and to undertake to God and the Church for it. We do not know that any persons (except the parents, or some other appointed by them) have any power to consent for the children, or to enter anto Covenant We desire it may be left free to parents, whether they will have Sureties to undertake for their children in Baptism. 
Excep.   
Ready at the Font.  
We desire it may be so placed, as all the Congregation may 
Rub. Excep.  best see and hear the whole administration.  
In the first Prayer.  
By the Baptism of thy well beloved Son, etc. didst sanctify the flood Jordan, and all other waters to the mystical washing away of sin.  
It being doubtful whether either the flood Jordan, or any other waters were sanctified to a Sacramental use by Christ's being baptised and not necessary to be altered: We desire this may be otherwise expressed.  
The third Exhoreation. 
Excep,   
Do promise by you that are their Sureties.  
The Questions.  

Dost thou forsake? etc.  
Dost thou believe? etc.  
Will't thou be baptised? etc.   
We know not by what right the Sureties do promise and answer 
Excep.  in the name of the Infant: It seemeth to us also to countenance the Anabaptistical opinion, of the necessity of an actual profession of faith and repentance in order to Baptism. Th●s such a profession may be required of the parents in their own name, and now solemnly renewed when they present their children to Baptism, we willingly grant: But the ask of one for another, is a practice, whose warrant we doubt: And we desire that the two first Interrogatories may be put to the Parents to be answered in their own names; and the last propounded to the Parents, or Pro-parents, thus;  
Will you have this child baptised into this Faith?  
In the second Prayer before Baptism.  
May receive remission of sins by spiritual regeneration.  
This expression seeming incovenient, we desire it may be 
Except.  changed into this, May be regenerated, and receive remission of sins.  
In the Prayer after Baptism.  
That it hath pleased thee to regenerate this Infant by thy holy Spirit.  
We cannot in Faith say, that every Child that is baptised, 
Excep.  is regenerated by God's Holy Spirit; at least, it is a disputable point, and therefore we desire that it may be otherwise expressed.  
After Baptism.  
Then shall the Priest make a Cross.  
Concerning the Cross in Baptism, we refer to our eighteenth 
Excep.  General.   

Of Private Baptism.  
WE desire that Baptism may not be administered in a private place at any time, unless by a lawful Minister, and in the presence of a competent number: That where it is evident that any child hath been so baptised, no part of the administration may be reiterated in public under any limitation; and therefore we see no need of any Lyturgy in that case.   

Of the Catechism.  
Quest. 1 What is your name?  
Quest. 2. Who gave you that name?  
Answ. My Godfathers and my Godmothers in my Baptism.  
Qust. 3. What did your Godfathers and Godmothers do for you in Baptism?  
We desire that these three first Questions may be altered, considering that the for greater number of persons baptised within 
Excep.  these twenty years last passed, had no Godfathers nor Godmothers at their Baptism. The like to be done in the seventh Question.  
Answ. 2. In my Baptism wherein I was made a Child of God, a member of Christ, and an Inheritor of the Kingdom of Heaven.  
We conceive it might more safely be expressed thus; Wherein 
Excep.  I was visibly admitted into the number of the members of Christ, the Children of God, and the Heirs (rather than the Inheritors) of the Kingdom of heaven.  
Of the Rehearsal of the ten Commandments.  
We desire that the Commandments may be inserted according to the new Translation of the Bible.  
10. Answ. My duty towards God, is to believe in him, etc.  
In this Answer there seems particular respect to be had to the 
Excep.  several Commandments of the first Table, as in the following Answer to those of the second; and therefore we desire it may be advised upon, whether to the last words of this Answer, may not be added particularly, On the Lord's day, otherwise there being nothing in all this answer that refers to the fourth Commandment.  
Qu. 14. How many Sacraments hath Christ ordained?  
Answ. Two only as generally necessary to salvation.  
That these words may be omitted, and answer thus given, 
Excep.  Two only, Baptism and the Lords Supper.  
Qu. 19 What is required of persons to be baptised?  
Answ. Repentance, whereby they forsake sin: and Faith, whereby they steadfastly believe the promise of God.  
Qu. 20. Why then are Infants baptised, when by reason of their tender age they cannot perform them?  
Answ. Yes, they do perform them by their Sureties, who promise and vow them both in their names.  
We desire that the entering of Infants into God's Covenant. 
Excep.  may be more warily expressed, and that the words may not seem to found their Baptism upon a real actual faith and repentance of their own. And we desire that a promise may not be taken for the performance of such faith and repentance; especially that it be not asserted, that they perform these by the promise of their Sureties, it being to the seed of Believers that the covenant of God is made, and not (that we can find) to all that have such believing Sureties, who are neither Parents nor Pro-parents of their children.  
In the general; We observe that the Doctrine of the Sacraments was added upon the conference at Hampton Court, is much more fully and particularly delivered, than the other parts of the Catechism in short Answers, fitted to the memories of children, and thereupon we offer it to be considered.  
1. Whether there should not be a more distinct and full explieation of the Creed, the Commandments, and the Lords Prayer.  
2. Whether it were not conutnient to add (what seems to be wanting) somewhat particularly concerning the nature of Faith, of Repentance, of the two Covenants, Justification, Sanctification, Adoption and Regeneration.   

Of Confirmation.  
The last Rubric before the Catechism.  
AND that no man should think that any detriment shall come 
Rub.  to Children by deferring of their Confirmation, he shall know for truth, that it is certain by God's Word, that Children by being baptised, have all things necessary for their Salvation, and be undoubtedly saved.  
Although we charitably suppose the meaning of these words 
Except.  was only to exclude the necessity of any other Sacraments to baptised Infants; yet these words are dangerous, as to the misleading of the vulgar, and therefore we desire they may be expunged.   

After the Catechism.  
SO soon as the Children can say in their mother tongue the Articles 
Rub,  of the Faith, the Lords Prayer, and the ten Commandments, and can answer to such other questions of the short Catechsm, &c: Then shall they be brought to the Bishop, and the Bishop shall confirm them.  
We conceive that it is not a sufficient qualification for confirmation, 
Except,  that Children be able memoriter to repeat the Articles of the faith, commonly called the Apostles Creed, the Lords Prayer, and the ten Commandments, and to answer to some questions of the short Catechism; for it's often found, that Children are able to do all this at four or five years old:  
2. It crosses what is said in the third reason of the first Rubric before confirmation, concerning the usage of the Church in times past, ordaining that Confirmation should be administered to them that are of perfect age, that they being instructed in Christian Religion, should openly profess their own faith, and promise to be obedient to the will of God.  
Thirdly, We desire that none may be confirmed, but according to his Majesty's Declaration. Viz. That Confirmatjoin be rightly and solemnly performed by the information, and with the consent of the Minister of the place.   

Rubric.  
After the Catechism.  
THen shall they be brought to the Bishop by one that shall he his Godfather or Godmother,  
This seems to bring in a second sort of Godfathers and Godmothers, 
Except.  beside, those made use of at Baptism, and we see no need either of the one or other.   

The Prayer before Imposition of hands.  
Who hast vouchsafed to regenerate these thy servants by water and the holy Ghost, and hast given them the forgiveness of all their sins.  
This supposeth all the Children who are brought to be confirmed, 
Excep.  have the Spirit of Christ, and the forgiveness of all their fins: whereas a great number of Children of that age having committed many sins since their Baptism, do show no evidence of serious repentance, or of any special saving grace: And therefore this confirmation (if administered to such) would be a perilous and gross abuse.   

Rub. Before the Imposition of hands.  
THe Bishop shall lay his hand upon each child severally.  
This seems to put a higher value upon Confirmation than 
Except.  upon Baptism or the Lord's Supper; for according to the Rules and Orders of the Common-Prayer-Book, every Deacon may Baptise, and every Minister may Consecrate and administer the Lords Supper; but the Bishop only may confirm.   

The Prayer after Imposition of hands.  
WE make our humble supplication to thee for these children, upon whom after the Example of thy holy Apostles, we have laid our hands to certify them by this sign of thy favour and gracious goodness towards them.  
We desire that the practice of the Apostles may not be alleged as a ground of the Imposition of hands for the confirmation of 
Except,  children, both because the Apostles did never use it in that ease, as also because the Articles of the Church of England declare it to be a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice. Art. 25.  
We desire that Imposition of hands may not be made (as here it is a sign to certify children of God's grace and favour towards them, because this serms to speak it a Sacrament, and is contrary to that fore mentioned 25. Art. which says, that Confirmation hath no visible sign appointed by God.   

The Rub. after Confirmation.  
NOne shall be admitted to the holy Communion, until such time as he can say the Catechism and be confirmed.  
We desire that Confirmation may not be made so necessary to the holy Communion, as that none should be admitted to it, 
Excep.  unless they be confirmed.   

Of the Form of solemnisation of Matrimony.  
THe man shall give the woman a Ring, etc. shall surely perform and keep the vow and covenant betwixt them made, whereof the 
Rub.  Ring given and received is a token and pledge, etc.  
Seeing the Ceremony of the Ring in marriage is made necessary 
Excep.  to it, and a significant sign of the vow and covenant betwixt the parties: and Romish Ritualists give such reasons for the institution and use of the Ring, as are either frivolous or superstitious: It is desired that this Ceremony of the Ring in marriage may be left indifferent to be used or forborn.  
The man shall say with my body I thee worship, etc.  
This word (worship) being much altered in the use of it, since this form was first drawn up. We desire some other word may be 
Excep.  used instead of it.  
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost etc.  
These words being only used in baptism, and here in the solemnisation of Matrimony, and in the absolution of the sick, We 
Excep.  desire it may be considered whither they should not here be omitted, lest they should seem to favour those that count Matrimony a Sacrament.  
Till death us depart.  
This word depart is here improperly used. 
Excep.   
Then the Mioister or Clerk going to the Lords Table shall say or 
Rub.  sing this Psalm.  
The Psalm ended, & the man and woman kneeling before the Lord's Table, the Priest standing at the Table, and turning his face, etc. 
Next Rub.   
We conceive the change of place and posture mentioned in these two Rubrics, is needless, and therefore desire it to be omitted. 
Excep.   
Consecrated the state of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery. Seeing the institution of Matrimony was before the fall, and so 
Collect.  before the promise of Christ, as also for that the said passage in 
Excep.  the Collect seems to countenance the opinion of making Matrimony a Sacrament, we desire that clause may be altered or omitted.  
Then shall begin the Communion, and after the Gospel shall be said a Sermon, etc. 
Rub.   
The new married persons, the same day of their marriage must receive the holy Communion. 
Lastrub.   
This Rubric doth either inform all such as are unfit for the Sacrament to forbear marriage, contrary to Scripture, which 
Excep.  approves the marriage of all men, or else compels all that marry to come to the Lords Table though never so unprepared. And therefore we desire it may be omitted, the rather because that marriage festivals are too often accompanied with such divertisements as are unsuitable to those Christian duties, which ought to be before and follow after the receiving that holy Sacrament.   

Of the order for the visitation of the sick.  
BEfore Absolution, here shall the sick person make a special confession etc. after which confession the Priest shall absolve him after 
Rub.  this sort.  
Our Lord Jesus Christ, etc.  
And by his Authority committed to me, I absolve thee. 
Rub.   
Forasmuch as the conditions of sick persons be very various and different, the Minister may not only in the exhortation, but 
Excep.  in the prayer also be directed to apply himself to the particular condition of the person as he shall find most suitable to the present occasion, with due regard had both to his spiritual condition and bodily weakness, and that the Absolution may be only recommended to the Minister to be used or omitted as he shall see occasion.  
That the form of the Absolution be declaratory and conditional, as (I pronounce thee absolved) instead (I absolve thee) if thou dost truly repent and believe.   

Of the Communion of the sick.  
BUt if the sick person be not able to come to Church, yet is desirous 
Rub.  to receive the Communion in his house, then must he give knowledge over night, or early in the morning to the Curate, and having a convenient place in the sick man's house, he shall there administer the holy Communion.  
Considering that many sick persons, either by their ignorance or vicious life, without any evident manifestation of repentance, 
Excep.  or by the nature of the disease disturbing their intellectuals, be unmeet for receiving the Sacrament: It is proposed that the Minister be not enjoined to administer the Sacrament to every sick person that shall desire it, but only as he shall judge expedient.   

Of the order for the burial of the dead.  
We desire it may be expressed in the Rubric that the prayers and exhortations here are not for the benefit of the dead, but only for instruction and comfort of the living.  
THe Priest meeting the Cords at the Church-stile shall say or else 
Rub.  the Priest and Clerk shall sing, etc.  
We desire that Ministers may be left to use their discretions in 
Excep.  these circumstances, and to perform the whole service in the Church, if they think fit for the preventing of those inconveniencies, which many times both Minister and people are exposed unto standing in the open air.  
For as much as it hath pleased Almighty God of his great mercy to take unto himself the soul of our dear Brother here departed, we 
Rub.  therefore commit his body to the ground, etc. In sure and certain hope of resurrection to eternal life.  
These words cannot in truth be said of persons living and dying 
Excep.  in open and notorious sins.   

The first Prayer.  
We give thee thanks for that it hath pleased thee to deliver this our Brother out of the misery of this sinful world. That we with this our Brother and all other departed in the true faith of thy holy Name may have our perfect consummation and bliss.  
These words may harden the wicked and are inconsistent with the largest Charity. 
Excep.    

The last Prayer.  
That when we depart this life we may rest with him, as our hope is this our Brother doth.  
These words cannot be used with respect to those persons who have not by their actual repentance given any ground for the 
Excep.  hope of their blessed hope.   

Of the thanksgiving of women after Childbirth commonly called the Churching of women.  
THe woman shall come into the Church, and there shall kneel 
Rub.  down in some convenient place nigh unto the place where the Table stands, and the Priest standing by shall say.  
In regard that the woman's kneeling where the Table is in many Churches inconvenient; we desire that those words may be left out, and that the Minister may perform that service in the 
Excep.  Desk or Pulpit.  
Then the Priest shall say this Psalm etc. 
Rub.   
This Psalm seems not so pertinent as some others: as Psal. 113. and Psal. 128. etc. 
Excep.   
Lord save this woman thy servant, which putteth her trust in thee.  
It may fall out that a woman may come to give thanks for a 
Ans. Excep.  Child born in Adultery or Fornication; And therefore we desire that something may be required of her by way of profession of her humiliation as well as of her thanksgiving.  
The woman that comes to give thanks must offer her accustomed offerings. 
Rub.   
This may seem too like a Jewish Purification, rather than a 
Excep.  Christian thanksgiving.  
And if there be a Communion it is convenient that she receive the 
The same Rubric.  holy Communion.  
We desire this may be interpreted (if duly qualified) for a scandalous sinner may come to make this thanksgiving. 
Excep.   
THus have we in all humble pursuance of his Majesty's most gracious endeavours for the public weal of this Church, drawn up our thoughts and desires in this weighty affair, which we most humbly offer to his Majesty's Commissioners for their serious and grave consideration: wherein we have not the least thoughts of depraving or reproaching the Book of Common-Prayer, but a sincere desire to contribute our endeavours towards leading the distempers (and as far as may be) reconciling the minds of Brethren. And in as much as his Majesty hath in his gracious Declaration and Commission mentioned new Forms to be made and suited to the several parts of worship: we have made a considerable progress therein, and shall by God's assistance offer them to the reverend Commissioners with all convenient speed. And if the Lord shall graciously please to give his blessing to these our endeavours, we doubt not but that the peace of this Church will be shortly settled, The hearts of Ministers and People comforted and composed, and the great mercy of Unity and Stability (to the immortal honour of our most dear Sovereign) bestowed upon us, and our posterity after us.  
August 30. 1661.    
FINIS.   

To the most Reverend ARCHBISHOP AND BISHOPS And the Reverend their Assistants, Commissioned by his Majesty, to treat about the Alteration of the Book of Common Prayer.  
Most Reverend Father and Reverend Brethren;  
WHen we received your Papers, and were told that they contained not only an answer to our Exceptition against the present Liturgy; But also several Concessions, wherein you seem willing to join with us in the Alteration and Reformation of it; Our expectations were so far raised, as that we promised ourselves, to find our Concessions so considerable, as would have greatly conduced to the healing of our much to be lamented Divivisions, the settling of the Nation in Peace, and the satisfaction of tender Consciences, according to his Majesty's most gracious Declaration, and his Royal Commission in pursuance thereof: but having taken a survey of them, we find ourselves exceedingly disappointed, and that they will fall far short of attaining those happy Ends, for which this meeting was first designed; as may appear both by the paucity of the Concessions, and the inconsiderableness of them, they being for the most part, Verbal and Literal, rather than Real, and Substantial; for in them you all allow not the laying aside of the reading of the Apocrypha for Lessons, though it shut out some bundreds of Chapters of Holy Scripture, and sometimes the Scripture itself is made to give way to the Apocryphal Chapters; you plead against the addition of the Doxology unto the Lord's prayer, you give no liberty to omit the too frequent repetition of Gloria Patria, nor of the Lord's Prayer in the same public Service, nor do you yield the Psalms be read in the new Translation, nor the word Priest to be changed for Minister or Presbyter, though both have been yielded unto in the Scottish Liturgy; you grant not the omission of the Responsals, no not in the Let any itself, though the Petitions be so framed, as the people make the prayer, and not the Minister; nor to read the Communion service in the Desk, when there is no Communion, but in the late Form instead thereof, it is enjoined to be done at the Table, through there be no Rubric in the Common Prayer book requiring it; you plead for the holiness of Lent, contrary to the statute; you indulge not the omission of any one Ceremony; you will force men to kneel at the Sacrament, and yet not put in that excellent Rubr. in the v. and vi. of Edw. 6. which would much conduce to the satisfaction of many that scruple it. And whereas divers Reverend Bishops and Doctors, in a paper in Print before these unhappy Wars began, yielded to the laying aside of the Cross, and the making many material alterations you after xx. years' sad calamities and divisions, seem unwilling to grant what they of their own accord then offered; you seem not to grant that the clause of the fourth commandment in the Common Prayer book (the Lord blessed the seventh day) should be altered according to the Hebr. Exod. 20. the Lord blessed the Sabbath day; you will not change the word Sunday into the Lord 's day, nor add any thing to make a difference between Holidays that are of Humane Institution: and the Lord's day, that is questionless of Apostolical practice; you will not alter Deadly Sin in the Litany into Heinous Sin, though it hints to us that some sins are in their own nature Venial; nor that Answer in the Catech. of two Sacraments only generally necessary to salvation, although it intimates that there are New Testament Sacraments, though Two only necessary to salvation; you speak of singing David 's Psalms, allowed by Authority, by way of contempt calling them Hopkins Psalms; and though singing of Psalms be an Ordinance of God, yet you call it one of our principal parts of Worship, as if it were disclaimed by you. And are so far from countenancing the use of conceived prayer in the public Worship of God (though we never intended thereby the excluding of set Forms) as that you seem to dislike the use of it even in the Pulpit, and heartily desire a total restaint of it in the Church; you will not allow the omission of the Benedicite, nor a Psalm to be read instead of it; nor so much as abate the reading of the chapters out of the Old Testament, and the Acts for the Epistles; But rather than you will gratify us therein, you have found out a new device, that the Minister shall say (for the Epistle) you will not so much as leave out in the Collect for Christmas day these words (this day) though at least it must be a great uncertainty, and cannot be true stylo veteri, & novo. In public Baptism you are so far from giving a liberty to the parent to answer for his own child (which seems most reasonable) as that you force him to the use of sureties, and cause them to answer in the name of the Infant, that he doth believe, and repent, and forsake the devil and all his work, which doth much favour the Anabaptistical opinion for the necessity of an actual profession of Faith and Repentance in order to Baptism; you will not leave the Minister in the visitation of the sick to use his judgement of discretion in absolving the sick person, or in giving the Sacrament to him, but enjoin both of them, though the person to his own judgement seem never so unfit; neither do you allow the Minister to pronounce the absolution in a Declarative and conditional way; but absolutely, and conditionately. And even in one of our concessions in which we suppose you intent to accommodate with us, you rather widen than heal the breach, for in your last Rubr. before the Catech you would have the words thus altered, That Children being baptised, have all things necessary for salvation, and dying before they commit any actual sin, be undoubtedly saved, though they be not confirmed, which assertion, if understood of all Infants even of Heathen, is certainly false, and if only of the Infants of Christians, is doubtful and contrary to the judgement of many learned Protestants, and will give little satisfaction to us or others; some more we might name, which for brevity sake we omit: All which considered we altogether despair of that happy success which thousands hope & wait for from this his Majesty's commission; unless God shall incline your hearts for the peace and union of the Nation to a more considerable & satisfactory alteration of the Liturgy. In which that we may the better prevail, we here tender an answer to your Reply, both against our general and particular Exceptions, of which we desire a serious perusal and candid interpretation. We have divided both your Preface and Reply into several Sections, that so you might more easily understand to which of the particulars both in the one and in the otoer our Answer doth refer.   

THE PAPERS That passed between the COMMISSIONERS Appointed by His Majesty for the Alteration of the COMMON PRAYER, etc.  
THe strain of these Papers we fear is like to persuade many that your design is not the same with ours: Being assured, that it is our Duty to do what we can to the peace and concord of Believers, especially when we had the past & present Calamities of these Nations to urge us, and His Majesty's Commands, & gracious Promises to encourage us, we judged the fittest means to be by making known the hindrances of our Concord, and without reviving the remembrance of those things that tend to exasperate, to apply ourselves with due submission to those that may contribute much to our recovery, and without personal reflections to propose the Remedies which we knew would be most effectual, and humbly and earnestly to petition you for your consent. But instead of Consent or amicable debates in order to the removal of our differences, we have received from you a Paper abounding with sharp accusations, as if your work were to prove us bad, and make us odious, which as it is attempted upon mistake, by unrighteous means, so were it accomplished, we know not how it will conduce to the Concord which ought to be our common end. If we understand Christ's Commission, or the Kings, and our duty as Christians, or as Ministers, our work now assigned us, was not to search after & aggravate the faults of one another, (though of our own in season we are willing to hear) but to review the Liturgy, and agree upon such alterations, diminutions, and enlargement, as are needful to our common unity & peace. What is amiss in us we shall thankfully accept your charitable assistance to discover, but we take not that for the question which his Majesty called us to debate: nor do our judgements or dispositions lead us to recriminations, nor to cast such impediments in the way of our desired accord: And were it not that our Calling and our Master's work are concerned somewhat in our just vindication, we should not trouble you with so low, so private, and unnecessary a work, but leave such Causes to the righteous Judge, who will quickly, impartially, infallibly and finally decide them.  

PREFACE.  
[BEfore we come to the Proposals, it will be perhaps necessary to say a 
Sect. 1.  word or two to the Preface, wherein they begin with a thankful acknowledgement of his Majesty's most Princely condescension, to which we shall only say, that we conceive the most real expression of their thankfulness had been an hearty compliance with his Majesty's earnest and passionate request for the use of the present Liturgy, at least so much of it as they acknowledge by these Papers to be lawful: how far they have in this expressed their thankfulness, the world sees, we need not say.]   

The Reply to your Preface.  
1. AS we hope it is no matter of offence to acknowledge his Majesty's gracious condescension, so when his Majesty by his Declaration hath granted us some liberty as to the use of the Liturgy before the Alteration, and hath by his Commission engaged us in a consultation for the alteration of it, we conceive our Brethren (nor the world to whose observation they appeal) had no warrant to censure us as unthankful to his Majesty, because of our present forbearance to use it, or part of it before the intended alteration: At least till they had heard us speak for ourselves, and render an account of the reasons of our forbearance, and they had gone before us more exemplarily in their own obedience to his Majesty's Declaration. As to our own Conscience, if we thought not the Common-Prayer Book to be guilty of the general and particular faults which we have laid open to you, we durst not have found fault with it; and while we took it to be a defective, disorderly, and inconvenient Mode of Worship, it would be our sin to use it of choice, while we may prefer a more convenient way, what ever we ought to do in case of necessity, when we must worship God inconveniently, or not at all. And as to our People, for whose Edification, and not Destruction, we have our Power or Offices, we have taken that course, as far as we are able to understand, which most probably tended to their good, and to prevent their hurt and separation from the Church: and consequently that course which did most conduce to his Majesty's Ends, and to his real Service, and the Church's Peace: none of which would be promoted by our obtruding that upon our People, which we know them unable to digest, or by our hasty offending them with the use of that, which we are forced to blame, and are endeavouring to correct and alter. And we see not how it can be justly intimated that we use no part of it, when we use the Lords Prayer, the Creed, the Commandments, the Psalms, the Chapters, and some other parts; And how much more you expect we should have used, that we might have escaped this brand of Ingratitude, we know not. But we know that Charity suffereth long and thinketh no evil, (1 Cor. 13. 4, 5.) and that we have not attempted to obtrude any mode of Worship on our Brethren, but desired the liberty to use things of that nature as may conduce to the benefit of our Flocks: And as we leave them to judge what is most beneficial to their own Flocks, who know them, and are upon the place; so it is but the like freedom which we desire, we are loath to hurt our People knowingly. The time is short, if you will answer our reasonable Proposals, it will not be too late at the expiration of our Commission, or the date of the reformed Liturgy to use it: greater liberty hath been used about Liturgies in purer times of the Church, with less offence and accusation.   

[It can be no just cause of offence to mind them of their duty as they do 
Sect. 2.  us of ours, telling us, it is our duty to imitate the Apostles practise in a special manner, to be tender of the Church's peace, and to advise of such expedients, as may conduce to the healing of breaches, and uniting those that differ; For preserving of the Church's peace we know no better nor more efficatious way than our set Liturgy, there being no such way to keep us from Schism as to speak all the same thing according to the Apostle.]   

Reply. If you look to the time past, by our Duties we suppose you mean our Faults; For it is not Duty when it's past: If you in these words respect only the time present and to come, we Reply, 1. The Liturgy we are assured will not be a less, but a more probable means of Concord after the desired Reformation than before; the defects and inconveniencies make it less fit to attain the end. 2ly. Whether the Apostle by speaking the same thing did mean either (all using this Liturgy of ours) or [all using any one form of Liturgy as to the words] may easily be determined. This is of much later date, unless you will denominate the whole form of the Lords Prayer, and some little parts. And those that affirm, that the Apostles than had any other, must undertake the task of proving it, and excusing the Churches for losing and dis-using so precious a Relict; which if preserved would have prevented all our strifes about these things. And in the mean time they must satisfy our Arguments for the Negative: As 1. If a Liturgy had been indicted by the Apostles for the Churches, being by universal Officers inspired by the Holy Ghost, and so of universal use, it would have been used and preserved by the Church as the Holy Scriptures were. But so it was not. Ergo no such Liturgy, was indicted by them for the Churches. 2ly. If a prescript form of words had been delivered them, there would have been no such need of exhorting them to speak the same thing, for the Liturgy would have held them close enough to that. And if the meaning had been (see that you use the same Liturgy) some word or other to some of the Churches would have acquainted us with the existence of such a thing, and some Reproofs we should have found of those that used various Liturgies, or form Liturgies of their own, or used extemporary prayers: and some express exhortations to use the same Liturgy or Forms: But the holy Scripture is silent in all those matters: It is apparent therefore that the Churches than had no Liturgy, but took liberty of extemporate expressions, and spoke in the things of God, as men do in other matters, with a natural plainess and seriousness, suiting their expressions to the subjects and occasions. And though Divisions began to disturb their Peace and holy Orders, the Apostle instead of prescribing them a Form of Divine Services for their Unity and Concord, do exhort them to use their Gifts and liberties aright, and speak the same thing for matter, avoiding Disagreements, though they used not the same words. 3. Just. Martyr, Tertull. and others sufficiently intimate to us, that the Churches quickly after the Apostles did use the personal Abilities of their Pastors in prayer, and give us no hint of any such Liturgy of Apostolical fabrication and imposition, and therefore doubtless there was nothing, for it could not have been so soon lost or neglected. 4. It is ordinary with those of the contrary judgement, to tell us that the extraordinary Gifts of the Primitive Christians, were the reason why there were no prescribed forms in those times, and that such Liturgies came in upon the ceasing of those Gifts: And 1 Cor. 14. describeth a way of public worshipping, unlike to prescript forms of Liturgy: So that the matter of Fact is proved and confessed. And then how fairly the words of the Apostles, exhorting them (to speak the same thing) are used to prove that he would have them use the same forms or Liturgy; we shall not tell you by any provoking aggravations of such abuse of Scripture. And indeed for all the miraculous Gifts of those times, if prescript forms had been judged by the Apostles to be the fittest means for the Concord of the Churches, it is most probable they would have prescribed such: Considering 1. That the said miraculous Gifts were extraordinary, and belonged not to all, nor to any at all times, and therefore could not suffice for the ordinary public Worship. 2. And those Gifts began even betimes to be abused, and need the Apostles Canons for their regulation, which he giveth them in that 1 Cor. 14. without a prescript Liturgy. 3. Because even then divisions had made not only an entrance, but an unhappy progress in the Churches, to cure which the Apostle exhorts them oft to Unanimity and Concord, without exhorting them to read the same or any Common-Prayer-book. 4. Because that the Apostles knew that perilous times would come, in which men would have itching ears, and would have heaps of Teachers, and would be selfwilled, and unruly, and divisions, and offences, and heresies would increase: And Ergo, as upon such foresight they indicted the holy Scriptures to keep the Church in all generations, from error and divisions in points of Doctrine, so the same reason and care would have moved them to do the same to keep the Churches in unity in point of Worship, if indeed they had taken prescribed forms to be needful to such an unity: they knew that after departure the Church would never have the like advantage, infallible, authorized, and enabled for delivering the universal Laws of Christ: And seeing in those parts of worship, which are of stated use, and still the same forms might have suited all ages as this age, and all Countries as this Country: (in the substance) there can no reason be given, why the Apostles should leave this undone, and not have performed it themselves, if they had judged such forms to be necessary, or the most desirable means of unity. If they had prescribed them, 1. The Church had been secured from error in them. 2. Believers had been preserved from divisions, about the lawfulness and fitness of them, as receiving them from God. 3. All Churches and Countries might had one Liturgy, as they have one Scripture, and so have all spoke the same things. 4. All ages would have had the same without innovation, (in all the parts that require not alteration) whereas now on the contrary, 1. Our Liturgies being the writings of fallible men, are liable to error, and we have cause to fear subscribing to them, as having nothing contrary to the word of God. 2. And matters of Humane institution have become the matter of scruple, and contention. 3. And the Churches have had great diversity of Liturgies. 4. And one age hath been mending what they supposed they received from the former faulty, and imperfect: So that our own which you are so loath to Change, hath not continued yet three Generations. And it is most evident that the Apostles being entrusted with the delivery of the entire rule of Faith and worship, and having such great advantages for our unity and peace, would never have omited the forming of a Liturgy of universal usefulness, to avoid all the foresaid inconveniences, if they had taken this course of unity to be so needful, or desirable as you seem to do. Whereas therefore you say you know no better or more efficatious way than our Liturgy, etc. We reply, 1. The Apostles knew the best way of unity, and of speaking the same thing in the matters of God: But the Apostles knew not our Liturgy, (nor any Common-Prayer-book, for aught hath yet been proved) Ergo the said Liturgy is not the best way of unity, or speaking the same thing, etc. 2. The Primitive Church in the next ages after the Apostles, knew the best way of unity, etc. But they knew not our Liturgy, Ergo our Liturgy (not known till lately) is not the best way 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. If it be said that our Liturgy is ancient, because the Sursum Corda, the Gloria Patri etc. are ancient. We answer, if indeed it be those ancient Sentences that denominate our Liturgy, we crave the justice to be esteemed users of the Liturgy, and not to suffer as refusers of it, as long as we use all that is found in it of such true antiquity.   

[This experience of former and latter times hath taught us, when the 
Sect. 3.  Liturgy was duly observed, we lived in peace, since that was laid aside, there hath been as many modes and fashions of public Worship, as fancies, we have had continual dissension, which vaeriety of Services must needs produce, whilst every one naturally desires and endeavours not only to maintain, but to prefer his own way before all others; whence we conceive there is no such way to the preservation of peace, as for all to return to the strict use and practise of the form.]   

Reply. Pardon us while we desire you to examine whether you speak as members that suffer with those that suffer, or rather as insensible of the calamities of your Brethren, that is as uncharitable: You say you lived in peace, but so did not the many thousands that were fain to seek them peaceable habitations in Holland, and in the Deserts of America, nor the many thousands that lived in danger of the High Commission, or Bishop's Courts at home, and so in danger of every malicious neighbour that would accuse them, hearing Sermons abroad, when they had none at home, or of meeting in a Neighbour's house to pray, or of not kneeling in the receiving of the Sacrament, etc. We would not have remembered you of these things, but that you necessitate us by pleading your peace in those days, as an argument for the imposing of the Liturgy. 2. Might not Scotland as strongly argue from this Medium against the Liturgy, and say, before the Liturgy was imposed on us, we had peace, but since then we have had no peace. 3. When the strict imposing of the strict use and practice of these forms, was the very thing that disquieted this Nation, (taking in the concomitant Ceremonies and subscription) when this was it that bred the Divisions which you complain of, and caused the separations from the Churches, and the troubles in the Churches; it is no better arguing to say, we must return to the strict use of that form if we will have peace, than it was in the Israelites to say, we will worship the Queen of Heaven, because than we had peace and plenty, when that was it that deprived them of peace and plenty, (we compare not the Causes, but the Arguments) nor is it any better an Argument, than if a man in a Dropsy, or Ague, that catcht it with voracity, or intemperance, should say, while I did eat and drink liberally, I had no Dropsy or Ague, but since my appetite is gone, and I have lived temperately, I have had no health, Ergo I must return to my intemperance, as the only way to health. Alas, is this the use that is made of all our experiences of the causes and progress of our Calamities? what have you, and we, and all smarted as we have done, and are you so speedily ready to return to the way that will engage you in violence against them that should be suffered to live in peace? If the furnace that should have refined us, and purified us all to a greater height of love, have but inflamed us to greater wrath, woe to us and to the Land that beareth us! what doleful things doth this prognosticate you, that prisons or other penalties will not change men's Judgements? And if it drive some to comply against their Consciences, and destroy their Souls, and drive the more conscientious out of the Land, or destroy their bodies, and breed in the minds of men a rooted opinion, that Bishops that are still hurting and afflicting them, (even for the things in which they exercise the best of their understanding, and cautelously to avoid sin against God) are no Fathers, Friends, or edifyers, but destroyers. Alas! who will have the gain of this? O let us no more bite, and devour one another, lest we be devoured one of another. Gal. 5. 15. or Christ be provoked to decide the Controversy more sharply than we desire or expect. 4. But really hath liberty to forbear the Liturgy produced such divisions as you mention? The Licence or connivance that was granted to Heretics, Apostates, and foulmouthed railers against the Scripture, Ministry, and all God's Ordinances, indeed bred confusions in the Land; But it is to us matter of admiration to observe (clean contrary to your intimation) how little discord there was in Prayer, and other parts of Worship among all the Churches throughout the three Nations, that agreed in Doctrine, and that forbore the Liturgy. It is wonderful to us in the review to consider, with what love, and peace, and concord, they all spoke the same things, that were tied to no form of words, even those that differed in some points of Discipline, even to a withdrawing from local communion with us, yet strangely agreed with us in worship. And where have there been less Heresies, Schisms, than in Scotland, where there was no such Liturgy to unite them? If you tell us of those that differ from us in Doctrine, and are not of us, it is as impertinent to the point of our own agreement in Worship, as to tell us of the Papists.   

[And the best expedients to unite us all to that again, and so to peace, are, besides our prayers to the God of Peace, to make us all of one mind in an house, to labour to get true humility, which would make us think our Guides wiser, and fitter to order us than we ourselves, and Christian Charity, which would teach us to think no evil of our Superiors, but to judge them rather careful Guides, and Fathers to us, which being obtained, nothing can be imagined justly to hinder us from a ready compliance to this method of Service appointed by them, and so live in unity.   

Reply. Prayer and Humility are indeed the necessary means of Peace: But if you will let us pray for peace in no words but what are in the Common-Prayer-book, their brevity and unaptness, and the customariness, that will take off the edge of fervour, with humane nature, will not give leave (or help sufficient) to our souls to work towards God, upon this Subject, with that enlargedness, copiousness, and freedom, as is necessary to due fervour. A brief transient touch, and away, is not enough to warm the heart arigne; and cold Prayers are like to have a cold return, and therefore, even for Peace sake, let us pray more copiously and heartily than the Common-Prayer-book will help us to do. And whether this be that cause, or whether it be that the Common-Prayer-book hath never a Prayer for itself, we find that its Prayers prevail not to reconcile many sober, serious persons to it that live in faithful fervent Prayer. 2. And for Humility, we humbly conceive it would most effectually heal us, and by causing the Pastors of the Church to know that they are not to rule the flocks as Lords, but as ensamples, not by constraint, but willingly, 1 Pet. 5. 2, 3. and it would cause them not to think so highly of themselves, and so meanly of their Brethren, as to judge no words fit to be used to God in the public Worship, but what they prescribe, and put into our mouths, and that other men are generally unable to speak sensibly, or suitably, unless they tell us what to say; or, that all others are unfit to be trusted with the expressing of their own desires: Humility would persuade the Pastors of the Church at least to undertake no more than the Apostles did, and no more to obtrude or impose their own words upon all others in the public Worship: If they found any unfit to be trusted with the expression of their minds in public Prayer, they would do what they could to get meeter men in their places, and till than they would restrain and help such as need it, and not upon that pretence as much restrain all the ablest Ministers, as if the whole Church were to be nominated, measured, or used, according to the quality of the most unworthy. And it is also true, that humility in private persons and inferiors, would do much to our peace, by keeping them in due submission, and obedience, and keeping them from all contentions and divisions, which proceed from self-conceitedness and pride. But yet, 1. The humblest, surest Subjects may stumble upon the scruple, whether Bishops differ not from Presbyters only in degree, and not in order or office, (it being a Controversy, and no resolved point of faith even amongst the Papists, whose faith is too extensive, and favour too Ecclesiastical, ambition too great) and consequently they may doubt whether men in the same order, do, by divine appointment, owe obedience unto those that gradually go before them. 2. And they may scruple whether such making themselves the Governors of their Brethren, make not themselves indeed of a different order or office, and so encroach not on the authority of Christ, who only maketh Officers purely Ecclesiastical; and whether it be no disloyalty to Christ to own such Officers. 3. And among those Divines that are for a threefold Episcopacy, (besides that of Presbyters, who are Episcopi Gregis) viz. General unfixed Bishops, like the Evangelists or Apostles, (in their measure) and the fixed Bishops of Parochial Churches, that have Presbyters to assist them, to whom they do preside, and also the Precedents of larger Synods) yet is it a matter of very great doubt, whether a fixed Diocesan being the Pastor of many hundred Churches, having none under him, that hath the power of Jurisdiction or Ordination, be indeed a Governor of Christ's appointment or approbation, and whether Christ will give us any more thanks for owning them as such, than the King will give us for owning an Usurper. Humility alone will not seem to subject these men to such a Government. 4. And though their coercive Magistratical power be easily submitted to, as being from the King, (how unfit Subjects soever Church men are of such a power) yet he that knoweth his Superiors best, doth honour God more, and supposeth God more infallible than man, and will feel himself most indispensibly bound by God's commands, and bound not to obey man against the Lord. And whereas there is much said against the people's taking on them to judge of the lawfulness of things commanded them by Superiors; we add, 5. That humble men may believe that their Superiors are fallible; that it is no impossibility to command things that God forbids, that in such Cases, if we have sufficient means to discern the sinfulness of such Commands, we must make use of them, and must obey God rather than men; that when the Apostles acted according to such a Resolution, Acts 4. 19 and Daniel and the three Witnesses, Dan. 6. and 3. they all exercised a judgement of Discerning upon the matter of their Superiors commands; that not to do so at all, is to make Subject's Bruits, and so no Subjects, because not rational free Agents, or to make all Governors to be gods. And lastly, That it will not save us from Hell, nor justify us at Judgement for sinning against God, to say, that Superiors commanded us, nor will it prove all the Martyrs to be sinners and condemned, because they judged of their Superiors commands, and disobeyed them. All which we say to show the insufficiency of the Remedy, hereby you propounded, (the humility of Inferiors) unless you will also add your help, without obedience there is no order or lasting concord to be expected: And by abasing the eternal God, so far as to set him and his Laws below a Creature, under pretence of obedience to the Creature, no good can be expected, because no peace with Heaven, without which, peace with men is but a Confederacy hastening each party to Destruction: And therefore absolute obedience must be given only to God the absolute Sovereign. In all this we suppose that we are all agreed: And therefore, 6. and lastly, We must say, that the way to make us think the Bishops to be so wise, and careful Guides and Fathers to us, is not for them to seem wiser than the Apostles, and make those things of standing necessity to the Church's unity, which the Apostles never made so, nor to forbid all to preach the Gospel, or to hold Communion with the Church, that dare not conform to things unnecessary. Love and tenderness are not used to express themselves by hurting and destroying men for nothing; And to silence and reject from Church Communion for a Ceremony, and in the mean time to persuade men that they love them, is but to stab or famish all the sick persons in the Hospital or Family, whose stomaches cannot take down the Dish we offer them, or whose throats are too narrow to swallow so big a morsel as we send them; And when we have done, to tell them, the only remedy is for them to believe we love them, and are tender of them. And who knows not that a man may think well of his Superiors, that yet may question whether all that he teacheth or commandeth him, be lawful.   


Sect 5.  [If it be objected, That the Liturgy is in any way sinful and unlawful for us to join with, it is but reason that this be first proved evidently, before any thing be altered: it is no Argument to say, that multitudes of sober pious persons scruple the use of it, unless it be made to appear by evident reasons, that the Liturgy gave the just grounds to make such scruples. For if the bare pretence of scruples be sufficient to exempt us from Obedience, all Law and Order is gone.]   

Reply. To this passage we humbly crave your consideration of these Answers; 1. We have not only said, (that sober pious persons scruple the Liturgy) but we have opened to you those defects, and disorders, and corruptions, which must needs make the imposing of it unlawful, when God might be more fitly served. 2. It is strange, that you must see it first evidently proved unlawful for men to join with the Liturgy (you mean, we suppose, to join with you in the using of it, or when you use it,) before you will see reason to alter any thing in it: what if it be only proved unlawful for you to impose it, though not for others to join with you when you do impose it, is this no reason to alter it? should you not have some care to avoid sin yourselves, as well as to preserve others from it? An inconvenient mode of Worship is a sin in the Imposer, and in the Chooser, and voluntary User, that might offer God better, and will not, Mal. 1. 13, 14. And yet it may not be only lawful, but a duty to him that by violence is necessitated to offer up that or none. And yet we suppose the Imposers should see cause to make an alteration. If you lived where you must receive the Lords Supper sitting, or not at all, it's like you would be of this mind yourselves. 3. Why should it be called a [bare pretence of scruples] as if you searched the Hearts, and knew (not only that they are upon mistake, but) that they are not real, when the persons not only profess them real, but are willing to use all just means that tend to their satisfaction, they study, read, pray, and will be glad of Conference with you, at any time, upon equal terms, if they may be themselves believed. 4. Even groundless scruples about the matter of an unnecessary Law, which hath that which to the weak both is and will be an appearance of evil, may be sufficient to make it the Duty of Rulers to reverse their impositions, though they be not sufficient to justify the Scrupulous. 5. If a man should think that he ought not to obey man, even when he thinketh it is against the Commands of God, though he be uncertain, (as in case of going on an unquestioned Warfare, or doing Doeg's execution, etc.) yet it followeth not, that [all Law and Order is gone] as long as all Laws and Orders stand that are visibly subservient to the Laws of God, and to his Sovereignty, or consistent with them, and when the Subject submitteth to suffering where he dare not obey.   

[On the contrary we judge, that if the Liturgy should be altered as is 
Sect. 6.  there required, not only a multitude, but the generality of the Soberest and most loyal Children of the Church of England would justly be offended, since such an alteration would be a virtual Confession that this Liturgy were an intolerable burden to tender Consciences, a direct cause of Schism a superstitious usage (upon which pretences it is here desired to be altered) which would at once both justify all those which have so obstinately separated from it, as the only pious, tender conscienced men, and condemn all those that have adhered to that, in conscience of their duty and loyalty, with their loss or hazard of estates, lives, and fortunes, as men superstitious, schismatical, and void of Religion and Conscience. For this reason and those that follow, we cannot consent to such an alteration as is desired, till these pretences be proved, which we conceive in no wise to be done in these Papers, and shall give reasons for this our Judgement.]   

Reply. If the Liturgy should be altered, as is here required, and desired by us, that it could be no just offence to the generality (or any) of the soberest and most loyal Children of the Church (as you speak) is easy to be proved, by laying together the considerations following: Because it is by themselves confessed to be alterable, as not having itself its former Constitution, till less than two hundred years ago. 2. And themselves affirm it to be not necessary to salvation, but a thing indifferent, while they exclude all higher institutions from the power of the Church. 3. They confess it lawful to serve God without this Liturgy, without which he was served by other Churches above 1460 years, and without which he is now served by other Churches, when the contrary minded doubt whether with it he be lawfully served. 4. Those that desire the alteration, desire no more than to serve God as the Churches did in the days of the Apostles, that had their most infallible Conduct. 5. And they offer also such Forms as are more unquestionable as to their Congruency to the word of God, and to the nature of the several parts of Worship. 6. And yet though they desire the surest Concord and an universal Reformation) they desire not to impose on others what they offer, but can thankfully accept a Liberty to use what is to their own Consciences most unquestionably safe, while other men use that which they like better. So that set all this together, with the consideration of the necessity of the preaching the Word, and Communion that is hereupon denied, and you may see it proved, That to have such a Liturgy so altered, that is confessed alterable, for so desirable an end, to the use only of those that cannot well use it, without urging others to any thing that they do themselves account unlawful, cannot be a matter of just offence to the generality of sober Children of the Church, nor to any one. And as to the reason given, it is apparently none. For, 1. Of those that scruple the unlawfulness of it, there are many that will not peremptorily affirm it unlawful, and condemn all that use it, but they dare not use it doubtingly themselves. 2. When our Papers were before you, we think it not just that you should say, that it's here desired to be altered, on the pretence that it is a direct cause of Schism and a superstitious usage: Have we any such expressions? If we have, let them be recited; if not, It is hard that this should even by you be thus affirmed, as is said by us, which we have not said: We have said [that the Ceremonies have been the Fountain of much evil, occasioning divisions, but not what you charge us to have said in words or sense. 3. And may not you alter them without approving, or seeming to approve the reason upon which the alteration is desired, when you have so great store of other reasons? The King in his Declaration is far enough from seeming to own the Charge against the things which he was pleased graciously to alter so far as is there expressed. If a Patient have a conceit that some one thing would kill him, if he took it, the Physician may well forbear him in that one thing, when it is not necessary to his health, without owning his reasons against it: If his Majesty have Subjects so weak as to contend about things indifferent, and if both sides err, one thinking them necessary, and the other sinful, may he not gratify either of them, without seeming to reprove their error. By this reason of yours he is by other men in such a Case necessitated to sin; For if he settle those things which some count necessary, he seems to approve of their opinion, that they are necessary: If he take them down when others call them sinful, he seems to own their charge of the sinfulness. But indeed he needeth not to do either, he may take them down, or leave them indifferent, professedly for unity and peace, and professedly disown the Errors on both sides. We are sorry if any did esteem these Forms and Ceremonies any better than mutable indifferent modes and circumstances of Worship: and did hazard estate or life for them as any otherwise esteemed: And we are sorry, that by our Divisions the Adversary of Peace hath gotten so great an advantage against us, as that the Argument against necessary charitable forbearance is fetched from the interest of the reputation of the contending Parties, that things may not be abated to others which you confess are indifferent and alterable, and which many of them durst not use, though to save their lives. And this because it will make them thought the pious, tender concienced men, and make others thought worse of. But with whom will it have these effects? those that you call the generality of the sober loyal children of the Church will think never the worse of themselves, because others have liberty to live by them without these things. And the rest, whose liberties you deny, will think rather the worse of you, than the better, for denying them their liberty in the worshipping of God. You undoubtedly argue here against the interest of Reputation, which you stand for, your Prefaces to your indulgencies, and your open Professions; and (if you will needs have it so) your own Practices, will tell the World loud enough, that the things which you adhered to with so great hazards are still lawful in your Judgement, and it will be your honour, and add to your reputation, to abate them to others, when it is in your power to be more severe. And if you refuse it, their sufferings will tell the World loud enough, that for their parts they still take them to be things unlawful. As for the reasons by them produced to prove them sinful, they have been publicly made known in the writings of many of them; In Ames his fresh suit against the Ceremonies, and in the Abridgement, etc. and in Bradshaws, Nicols, and other men's Writings.   

[To the first general Proposal we answer, That as to that part of it 
Prop. u. 1. Sect. 5.  which requires, that the matter of the Liturgy may not be private opinion or fancy, that being the way to perpetuate Schism; the Church hath been careful to put nothing into the Liturgy, but that which is either evidently the Word of God, or what hath been generally received in the Catholic Church, neither of which can be called private opinion: and if the contrary can be proved, we wish it out of the Liturgy.]   

Reply. We call those Opinions which are not determined Certainties, and though the greater number should hold them as Opinions, they are not therefore the Doctrines of the Church, and therefore might be called Private Opinions; but indeed we used not the Word (that we can find:) the thing we desired, was, that the materials of the Liturgy may consist of nothing doubtful, or questioned among pious learned and orthodox Persons.] We said also (that the limiting Church Communion to things of doubtful disputation, hath been in all Ages the ground of Schism and Separation (which is not to say, that the Liturgy itself, is a Superstitious usage, or a directs cause of Schism,) And we cited the words of a Learned man (Mr. Hales) not as making every word our own, but as a Testimony ad hominem, because he was so highly valued by yourselves (as we suppose) and therefore we thought his words might be more regarded by you than our own. 2. Where you say [that the Church hath been careful to put nothing in the Liturgy, but that which is either evidently the word of God, or that which had been generally received in the Catholic Church.] We reply, 1. We suppose there is little or nothing now controverted between us, which you will say is evidently the Word of God, either the Forms or Ceremonies, or any of the rest. 2. If by [in the Church] you mean [not by the Church] but [by any part in the Church] how shall we know that they did well. And if by [the generality] you mean not All, but the Greater part, you undertake the proof of that which is not easy to be proved. It being so hard to judge of the majority of Persons in the Catholic Church in any notable differences. We do take it for granted, that you limit not the Catholic Church, as the Papists do, to the Confines of the Roman Empire, but indeed we can only wish, that your Assertion were true, while we must show it to be untrue, if you speak of the Primitive Church, or of an universality of time, as well as place, (if not its more against you, that the Primitive Catholic Church was against you.) The very thing in question that containeth the rest [that it's needful to the peace of the Church, that all the Churches under one Prince should use one form of Liturgy] was not received by the Catholic Church, nor by the generality in it: when it is so well known that they used diversity of Liturgies and Customs in the Roman Empire. The generality in the Catholic Church received not the Lord's Supper Kneeling, at least on any Lords days, when it was forbidden by divers general Councils, and when this prohibition was generally received as an Apostolical tradition: We have not heard it proved, that the Surplice or Cross, as used with us, wree received by the Universal Church; It is a private Opinion not received by the Catholic Church, that [it is requisite that no man should come to the Holy Communion, but with a full trust in God's mercy, and with a quiet Conscience,] though it be every man's duty to be perfect pro statu viatoris, yet it is not requisite that no man come till he be perfect. He that hath but a weak Faith (though not a full trust) must come to have it strenthned: And he that hath an unquiet Conscience, must come to receive that mercy which may quiet it. It is a private Opinion, and not generally received in the Catholic Church [that one of the People] may make the Public Confession at the Sacrament, in the name of all those that are minded to receive the Holy Communion] It is a private and not generally received distinction, that the body of Christ makes clean our bodies, and his blood washeth our souls.] It is a doubtful opinion, to speak easily, that when the Lords Supper is delivered with a Prayer not made in the Receivers name, but thus directed to him by the Minister [the Body of our Lord Jesus Christ, etc. preserve thy Body and Soul,] it is so intolerable a thing for the Receiver not to kneel, in hearing the Prayer, that he must else be thrust from the Communion of the Church, and yet that no Minister shall kneel, that indeed doth pray: But he may pray standing, and the Hearers be cast out for standing at the same words. It is not a generally received, but a private opinion, [that every Parishioner (though impenitent, and conscious of his utter unfitness, and though he be in despair, and think he shall take his own damnation) must be forced to receive thrice a year: when yet even those that have not [a full trust in God's mercy] or [have not a quiet Conscience] were before pronounced so uncapable, as that none such should come to the Communion.] Abundance more such Instances may be given to show how far from truth the Assertion is, that [the Church hath been careful to put nothing into the Liturgy, but that which is either evidently the Word of God, or which hath been generally received in the Catholic Church] unless you speak of some unhappy unsuccesful Carefulness. But we thankfully accept of your following words, [and if the contrary can be proved we wish it out of the Liturgy] which we entreat you to perform, and impartially receive our proofs. But then we must also entreat you; 1. That the Primitive Church's Judgement and practice may be preferred before the present declined, much corrupted State. And 2. If God's Law rather than the sinful practices of men breaking that Law may be the Church's Rule for Worship: For you call us to subscribe to Art. 19 that [as the Church of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch hath erred, so also the Church of Rome hath erred, not only in their living, and manner of Ceremonies, but also in matters of Faith: and saith Rogers, in Art. 20. they are out of the way, which think that either one man, as the Pope, or any certain Calling of men, as the Clergy, hath power to decree, and appoint Rites or Ceremonies, though of themselves good, unto the whole Church of God, dispersed over the universal world,] and indeed if you would have all that Corruption brought into our Liturgy, and Discipline, and Doctrine, which the Papists, Greeks, and others, that undoubtedly make up the far greater number of the now universal Church do use: you would deserve no more thanks of God, or man, than he that would have all Kings, and Nobles, and Gentry, leveled with the poor Commons, because the latter are the greater number, or than he that would have the healthful conformed to the sick, when an epidemical disease hath made them the Majority, or than he that would teach us to follow a multitude to do evil, and to break more than the least Commands, because the greater number break them; we pray you therefore to take it for no justication of any uncertain or faulty passage in our Liturgy, though the greater number now are guilty of it. 3. And we must beseech you, if the Church's Judgement or Practice must be urged, that you would do us the justice, as to imitate the ancient Churches in your sense of the quality, and the mode and measure of using, and imposing things, as well as in the materials used, and imposed Consider not only [whether you find such things received by the ancient Churches,] but also consider how they were received, esteemed, and used,] whether as necessary or indifferent, as points of Faith, or doubtful Opinions, whether forced on others, or left to their free choice: If you find that the generality of the ancient Churches received the White Garment after Baptism, and the tasting of Milk and Honey as Ceremonies freely, though generally used, you should not therefore force men to use them: If you find that the Doctrine of the Millennium, or of Angel's corporeity was generally received as an Opinion, it will not warrant you to receive either of them as a certain necessary truth. If you find that the General Counsels forbade Kneeling in any Adoration on the Lords days, but without force against Dissenters, you may not go deny the Sacrament to all that kneel, nor yet forbid them to kneel in praying. So if you find some little parcels of our Liturgy, or some of our Ceremonies used as things indifferent, left to choice, forced upon none, but one Church differing from another in such usages or observances, this will not warrant you to use the same things as necessary to order, unity, or peace, and to be forced upon all; use them no otherwise than the Churches used them.   

[We heartily desire, that according to this Proposal, great care may be taken to suppress these private Conceptions of Prayers before and after Sermon, 
Sect. 2.  lest private opinions be made the matter of Prayer in public, as hath, and will be, if private persons take liberty to make public Prayers.]   

Reply. The desire of your hearts is the grief of our hearts, the Conceptions of Prayer by a public person, according to a public Rule, for a public use, are not to be rejected as private Conceptions: We had hoped you had designed no such innovation as this in the Church: When we have heard any say that it would come to this, and that you designed the suppression of the free Prayers of Ministers in the Pulpit, suited to the variety of subjects and occasions, we have rebuked them as uncharitable in passing so heavy a censure on you: And what would have been said of us a year ago, if we should have said that this was in your hearts? nothing will more alienate the hearts of many holy prudent persons from the Common-Prayer, than to perceive that it is framed and used as an Instrument to shut out all other Prayers, as the Ministers private Conceptions. Such an end and design will make it under the notion of a means, another thing than else it would be, and afford men such an Argument against it, as we desire them not to have: but we hope you speak not the public sense. As the Apostles desired (as aforesaid) that all would speak the same things, without giving them (that ever was proved) a form of words to speak them in, so might we propose to you, that uncertain opinions be made no part of our Liturgy without putting all their words into their mouths, in which their desires must be uttered. Your hearty desire, and the reason of it, makes not only against extemporary Prayer, but all prepared, or written forms, or Liturgies, that were indicted only by one man, and have not the consent antecedently of others. And do you think this was the course of the Primitive times? Basil thus used his private Conceptions at Caesarea, and Greg. Thaumaturgus before him at Neocesarea, and all Pastors in Justin Martyrs and Tertullia's days. And how injurious is it to the public Officers of Christ, the Bishops and Pastors of the Churches, to be called private men, who are public persons in the Church, if they be not? every single person is not a private person, else Kings and Judges would be so. And have you not better means to shut out private opinions, than the forbidding Ministers praying in the Pulpit, according to the variety of subjects and occasions: You have first the Examination of persons to be ordained, and may see that they be able to speak sense, and fit to manage their proper works with judgement and discretion, before you ordain them; And some confidence may be put in a man in his proper calling and work, to which he is admitted with so great care, as we hope (or desire) you will admit them; If you are necessitated to admit some few that are injudicious, or unmeet, we beseech you (not only to restore the many hundred worthy men laid by, to a capacity, but that you will not so dishonour the whole Church, as to suppose all such, and to use all as such, but restrain those that deserve restraint, and not all others for their sakes: And next you have a public Rule (the Holy Scripture) for these men to pray by, and if any of them be intolerably guilty of weaknesses or rashness, or other miscarriages, the words being spoken in public, you have witness enough, and sure there is power enough in Magistrates and Bishops to punish them, and if they prove incorrigible, to cast them out. In all other professions these means are thought sufficient to regulate the Professors, His Majesty thinks it enough to regulate his Judges, that he may choose able men, and fit to be trusted in their proper work, and that they are responsible for all their maladministrations, without prescribing them forms, beyond which they may not speak any thing in their Charge. Physicians being first tried, and responsible for their doings, are constantly trusted with the lives of high and low, without tying them to give no counsel, or medicine, but by the prescript of a Book, or determination of a College: And it is so undeniable, that your reason makes more against Preaching, and for only reading Homilies, as that we must like it the worse, if not fear what will become of Preaching also. For 1. It is known that in Preaching a man hath far greater opportunity, and liberty to vent a false or private opinion, than in Prayer. 2. It is known de eventu, that it is much more ordinary. And if you say [that he speaks not the words of the Church, but his own, nor unto God, but man, and therefore it is less matter.] We answer, it is as considerable, if not much more, from whom he speaks, than to whom, he speaks as the Minister of Christ, in his stead and name, 2 Cor. 5. 19, 20. And it is as a higher, so a more Reverend thing to speak in God's name to the people, than in the people's name to God; and to speak that which we call God's word, or truth, or message, than that which we call but our own desire: We make God a liar, or corrupt in his words, if we speak a falsehood in his name; we make but ourselves liars, if we speak a falsehood to him in our own names; The former therefore is the more heinous and dreadful abuse, and more to be avoided: or if but equally, it shows the tendency of your reason, (for we will not say of your design, as hoping you intent not to make us Russians) We do therefore for the sake of the poor threatened Church, beseech you that you will be pleased to repent of these desires, and not to prosecute them, considering that to avoid a lesser evil (avoidable by safer means) you will bring a far greater evil on the Churches, and such as is like to strip these Nations of the glory in which they have excelled the rest of the world, even a learned, able, holy Ministry, and a people sincere, and serious, and understanding in the matters of their Salvation. For 1. As it is well known that an ignorant man may read a Prayer and Homily as distinctly and laudably as a Learned Divine, and so may do the work of a Minister, if this be it; so it is known that man's nature is so addicted to ease and sensual diversions, as that multitudes will make no better preparations, when they find that no more is necessary, when they are as capable of their places and maintenance if they can but read, and are forced upon no exercise of their parts, which may detect and shame their ignorance, but the same words are to be read by the ablest and ignorantest man; it is certain that this will make multitudes idle in their Academical Studies, and multitudes to spend their time idly all the year, in the course of their Ministry: and when they have no necessity that they are sensible of, of diligent studies, it will let loose their fleshly voluptuous inclinations, and they will spend their time in sports, and drinking, and prating, and idleness, and this will be a Seminary of Lust: or they will follow the world, and drown themselves in Covetousness and Ambition, and their hearts will be like their studies: As its the way to have a holy, able Ministry, to engage them to holy studies, to meditate on God's Law day and night, so it's the way to have an ignorant, profane and scandalous Ministry (and consequently Enemies to serious Godliness in others) to impose upon them but such a work, as in ignorance and idleness, they may perform as well as the judicious and the diligent. If it be said [that their parts may be tried and exercised some other way] we answer, where should a Ministers parts be exercised, if not in the Pulpit, or the Church, and in Catechising, in private Baptism, and Communion, and in the visitation of the sick? their work also is such as a Schoolboy may do as well as they, their ignorance having the same Cloak, as in public. If it be said [that a Ministers work is not to show his parts] we answer, but his Ministerial work is, to show men their sins, and to preach the wonderful Mysteries of the Gospel, to help men to search, and understand the Scriptures, and to search, and to know their hearts, and to know God in Christ, and to hope for the glory that is to be revealed: and fervently to pray for the success of his endeavours, and the blessings of the Gospel on the people, and cheerfully to praise God for his various benefits, which cannot be well done without abilities. A Physician's work is not to show his parts ultimately, but it is to do that for the cure of diseases which without parts he cannot do, and in the exercise of his parts, on which the issue much depends, to save men's lives. The ostentation of his good works, is not the work of a good Christian: and yet he must so let his light shine before men, that they may see his good works, and glorify God. And undeniable experience tells us, that God ordinarily proportioneth the success and blessing, to the skill, and holiness and diligence of the Instruments, and blesseth not the labours of ignorant, ungodly Drones, as he doth the labours of able faithful Ministers. And also that the readiest way to bring the Gospel into contempt into the world, and cause all religion to dwindle away into formality first, and then to barbarism and brutishness, is to let in an ignorant, idle, vicious Ministry, that will become the people's scorn: Yea, this is the way to extirpate Christianity out of any Country in the world, which is decaying a pace when men grow ignorant of the nature and reasons of it, and unexperienced in its power and delightful fruits, and when the Teachers themselves grow unable to defend it. And we must add, that whatsoever can be expected duly to affect the heart, must keep the intellect, and all the faculties awake in diligent attention, and exercise: And in the use of a form, which we have frequently heard and read, the faculties are not so necessitated and urged to attention, and serious exercise, as they be when from our own understanding we are set about the natural work of representing to others what we discern and feel. Man's mind is naturally slothful, and will take its ease, and remit its seriousness longer than it is urged by necessity, or drawn out by delight, when we know beforehand, that we have no more to do, but read a Prayer, or Homily, we shall ordinarily be in danger of letting our minds go another way, and think of other matters, and be senseless of the work in hand. Though he is but an Hypocrite that is carried on by no greater motive than man's observation, and approbation; yet is it a help not to be depised, when even a necessity of avoiding just shame with men, shall necessarily awake our invention, and all our faculties to the work, and be a concurrent help with spiritual motives. And common experience tells us, that the best are apt to lose a great deal of their affection, by the constant use of the same words or forms; Let the same Sermon be preached an hundred times over, and try whether an hundred for one will not be much less moved by it, than they were at first. It is not only the common corruption of our nature, but somewhat of innocent infirmity that is the cause of this. And man must cease to be man, or to be mortal, before it will be otherwise; so that the nature of the thing, and the common experience of our own dispositions, and of the effect on others, assureth us, that understanding serious Godliness, is like to be extinguished, if only forms be allowed in the Church, on pretence of extinguishing errors and divisions: And though we have concurred to offer you our more corrected Nepenthes, yet must we before God and men, protest against the dose of Opium which you here prescribe or wish for, as that which plainly tendeth to cure the disease by the extinguishing of life, and to unite us all in a dead Religion. And when the Prayers that avail must be effectual and servant, Jam. 5. 16. and God will be worshipped in spirit and truth, and more regardeth the frame of the heart, than the comeliness of expression; we have no reason to be taken with any thing that pretends to help the tongue, while we are sure it ordinarily hurts the heart: And it is not the affirmations of any men in the world, persuading us of the harmlesness of such a course that can so far unman us, as to make us disbelieve both our own experience, and common observation of the effect on others. Yet we confess that some forms have their laudable use, to cure that error and vice, that lieth on the other extreme. And might we but sometimes have the liberty to interpose such words as are needful to call home and quicken attention and affection, we should think that a convenient conjunction of both, might be a well tempered means to the common constitutions of most. But still we see the world will run into extremes, what ever be said or done to hinder it. It is but lately that we were put to it, against one extreme, to defend the lawfulness of a form of Liturgy; now the other extreme it troubleth us, that we are forced against you, even such as you, to defend the use of such Prayers of the Pastors of the Churches, as are necessarily varied according to subjects and occasions, while you would have no Prayer at all in the Church, but such prescribed forms. And why may we not add, that whoever maketh the forms imposed on us, if he use them, is guilty as well as we of praying according to his private conceptions? And that we never said it proved from Scripture, that Christ appointed any to such an Office, as to make Prayers for other Pastors and Churches to offer up to God: and that this being none of the work of the Apostolic, or common Ministerial Office in the Primitive Church, is no work of any Office of Divine Institution.   

[To that part of the Proposal, that the Prayers may consist of nothing 
Sect. 3.  doubtful, or questioned by pious, learned, and orthodox persons; they not determining who be those orthodox Persons, we must either take all them for orthodox Persons, who shall confidently affirm themselves to be such, and then we say; First, The Demand is unreasonable, for some such as call themselves orthodox, have questioned the prime Article of our Creed, even the Divinity of the Son of God, and yet there is no reason we should part with our Creed for that. Besides, the Proposal requires impossiblity, for there never was, nor is, nor can be such Prayers made, as have not been, nor will be questioned by some who call themselves, pious, learned, and orthodox: if by orthodox be meant those who adhere to Scripture, and the Catholic Consent of Antiquity, we do not yet know that any part of our Liturgy hath been questioned by such.]   

Reply. And may we not thus mention orthodox Persons to men that profess they agree with us in Doctrinals, unless we digress to tell you who they be? What if we were pleading for civil Concord among all that are loyal to the King, must we needs digress to tell you who are loyal? We are agreed in one Rule of Faith, in one Holy Scripture, and one Creed, and differ not (you say) about the Doctrinal part of the 39 Art. And will not all this seem to tell you who are Orthodox. If you are resolved to make all that a matter of Contention, which we desire to make a means of Peace, there is no remedy while you have the Ball before you, and have the Wind and Sun, and the power of contending without control. But we perceive, [That the Catholic consent of Antiquity] must go into your definition of the Orthodox, but how hard it is to get a reconciling determination, what Ages shall go with you, and us, for the true Antiquity, and what is necessary to that consent that must be called Catholic, is unknown to none but the unexperienced. And indeed we think a man that searcheth the holy Scripture, and sincerely and unreservedly gives up his Soul to understand, love and obey it, may be Orthodox, without the knowledge of Church-History; we know no universal Lawgiver, nor Law to the Church, but one, and that Law is the sufficient rule of Faith, and consequently the test of the truly Orthodox, though we refuse not Church-History, or other means that may help us to understand it. And to acquaint you with what you do not know, we ourselves (after many Pastors of the Reformed Churches) do question your Liturgy, as far as is expressed in our Papers: And we profess [to adhere to Scripture, and the Catholic Consent of Antiquity] (as described by Vincentius Liniensis) If you will say, that our Pretence and Claim is unjust, we call for your Authority to judge our Hearts, or depose us from the number of the Orthodox, or else for your proofs to make good your Accusation. But however you judge, we rejoice in the expectation of the righteous Judgement, that shall finally decide the Controversy; to which, from this Aspersion, we appeal.   

[To those Generals, loading Public Form with Ch. pomp, garm. Imagery, 
Sect. 4.  and many Superfluities that creep into the Church under the name of Order and Decency, encumbering Churches with Superfluities, over ridgid reviving of obsolete Customs, etc. We say, that if these Generals be intended as appliable to our Liturgy in particular, they are gross and foul Slanders, contrary to their Profession, page ult. and so either that or this contrary to their Conscience, if not, they signify nothing to the present business, and so might with more prudence and candour have been omitted.]   

Reply. You needed not go a fishing for our Charge; what we had to say against the Liturgy, which we now desired you to observe, was here plainly laid before you; Answer to this, and suppose us not to say, what we do not, to make yourselves matter of reproaching us with gross and foul slanders. Only we pray you answer Mr. Hales, as Mr. Hales, (whom we took to be a Person of much esteem with you), especially that passage of his which you take no notice of, as not being so easy to be answered, for the weight and strength which it carries with it; viz. That the li mitting of the Church Communion to things of doubtful disputation, hath been in all Ages the ground of Schism and Separation, and that he that separates from suspected Opinions is not the Separatist. And may we not cite such words of one that we thought you honoured, and would hear without contradicting our Profession, of not intending depravation or reproach against the Book without going against our consciences? If we cite the words of an Author for a particular use (as to persuade you of the evil of laying the Church's Unity upon unnecessary things) must we be responsible therefore for all that you can say against his words in other respects? we suppose you would be loath your words should have such interpretations, and that you should be under such a Law for all your Citations; do as you would be done by.   

[It was the wisdom of our Reformers to draw up such a Liturgy as 
Sect. 2.  neither Romanist, nor Protestant could justly excopt against, and therefore as the first never charged it with any positive errors, but only the want of something they conceived necessary: so it was never found fault with by those to whom the name of Protestants most properly belongs, those that profess the Augustine Confession: and for those who unlawfully and sinfully brought it into dislike with some people to urge the present Stave of Affairs, as an Argument why the Book should be altered, to give them satisfaction, and so that they should take advantage by their own unwarrantable Acts, is not reasonable.]   

Reply. If it be blameless, no man can justly except against it; But that de facto the Romanists never charged it with any positive errors, is an Assertion that maketh them reform, and reconcilable to us, beyond all belief: Is not the very using it in our own Tongue a positive error in their account? Is it no positive error in the Papists account, that we profess [to receive these Creatures of Bread and Wine?] do they think we have no positive error in our Catechism about the Sacraments, that affirmeth it to be Bread and Wine after the Consecration, and makes but two Sacraments necessary? etc.] 2. And unless we were nearlier agreed than we are, it seemeth to us no commendation of a Liturgy, that the Papists charge it with no positive error. 3. That no Divines, or private men at home, or of Foreign Churches [that ever found fault with the Liturgy, are such to whom the name of Protestant properly belongeth] is an assertion that proveth not what authority of judging your Brethren you have, but what you assume, and commendeth your Charity no more than it commendeth the Papists, that they deny us to be Catholics. Calvin and Bucer subscribed the Augustine Confession, and so have others that have found fault with our Liturgy. 4. If any of us have blamed it to the people, it is but with such a sort of blame, as we have here expressed against it to yourselves; And whether it be [unlawful, and sinful] the impartial comparing of your words with ours, will help the willing Reader to discern. But if we prove indeed that it is [defective and faulty, that you bring for an Offering to God] when you or your Neighbours have a better, which you will not bring, nor suffer them that would (Mal. 1. 13.) and that you call evil good in justifying its blemishes, which in humble modesty we besought you to amend, or excuse us from offering, than God will better judge of the unlawful act than you have done. But you have not proved, that all, or most of us, have caused the people at all to dislike it; if any of us have, yet weigh our Argument, though from the present state of affairs: or, if you will not hear us, we beseech you hear the many Ministers in England, that never meddled against the Liturgy, and the many moderate Episcopal Divines that have used it, and can do still, and yet would earnestly entreat you to alter it, partly because of what in it needs alteration, and partly in respect to the Commodity of others; Or at least we beseech you recant, and obliterate such passages as would hinder all yourselves from any act of Reformation hereabout, that if any man among you would find fault with some of the grosser things, which we laid open to you (tenderly and spiringly) and would reform them: he may not presently forfeit the reputation of being a Protestant: And lastly, we beseech you deny not again the name of Protestants to the Primate of Ireland, the Archbishop of York, and the many others that had divers meetings for the Reformation of the Liturgy, and who drew up that Catalogue of faults, or points, that needed mending, which is yet to be seeu in print; they took not advantage of their own unwarrantable Acts for the attempting of that alteration.   

[The third and fourth Proposals may go together, the demand in 
N. 3, 4.  both being against Responsals, and alternate Readins, in Hymns and Psalms, and Litany, etc. And that upon such Reason as doth in truth enforce the necessity of continuing them as they are, namely, for edification. They would take these away, because they do not edify, and upon that very reason they should continue, because they do edify: If not by informing of our reasons and understandings, (the Prayers and Hymns were never made for a Catechism) yet by quickening, continuing, and uniting our devotion, which is apt to freeze, or sleep, or flat in a long continued Prayer, or form; it is necessary therefore for the edifying of us therein, to be often called upon and awakened by frequent Amens, to be excited and stirred up by mutual exultations, provocations, petitions, holy contentions and strive, which shall most show his own, and stir up others zeal to the glory of God. For this purpose alternate Reading, Repetitions and Responsals, are far better than a long tedious Prayer: Nor is this our opinion only, but the 
Socrat. 1. 6. cap. 8. Theodor. 1. 2. c. 24. 2 Chron. 7. 1, 4. Ezra 3. 11.  Judgement of former Ages, as appears by the practice of ancient Christian Churches, and of the Jews also. But it seems they say to be against the Scripture, wherein the Minister is appointed for the People in public Prayers, the people's part being to attend with silence, and to declare their assent in the close, by saying Amen; if they mean that the people in public Services must only say this word Amen, as they can no more prove it in Scriptures, so it doth certainly seem to them, that it cannot be proved; for they directly practise the contrary in one of their principal parts of Worship, singing of Psalms, where the people bear as great a part as the Minister. If this way be done in Hopkin's, why not in David's Pslams? if in Metre, why not in Prose? if in a Psalm, why not in a Litany?]   

Reply. What is most for edification, is best known by experience, and by the reason of the thing; For the former, you are not the Masters of all men's experience, but of your own, and others that have acquainted you with the same, as theirs: We also may warrantably profess in the name of ourselves, and many thousands of sober pious persons, that we experience that these things are against our edification, and we beseech you do not by us, what you would not do by the poor labouring servants of your family, to measure them all their diet for quality or quantity, according to your own appetites, which they think are diseased, and would be better, if you worked as hard as they; And we gave you some of the reasons of our judgement. 1. Though we have not said that the people may not in psalms to God concur in voice, (we speak of prayer which you should have observed) and though we only concluded it agreeable to the Scripture practice, for the people in prayer to say but their Amen, yet knowing not from whom to understand the will of God, and what is pleasing to him, better than from himself, we considered what the Scripture saith of the ordinary way of public worship; and finding ordinarily that the people spoke no more in prayer (as distinct from Psalms and praise) than their Amen, or mere consent, we desired to imitate the surest pattern. 2. As we find that the Minister is the mouth of the people to God in public (which Scripture, and the necessity of order, do require) so we were loath to countenance the people's invading of that Sacred Office, so far as they seem to us to do; 1. By reading half the Psalms and Hymns; 2. By saying half the Prayers, as the Minister doth the other half; 3. By being one of them the mouth of all the rest in the Confession at the Lords Supper; 4. By being the only Petitioners, in the far greatest part of all the Litany, by their [good Lord deliver us] and [we beseech thee to hear us good Lord] while the Minister only reciteth the matter of the prayer, and maketh none of the Request at all, we fear lest by parity of reason, the people will claim the work of preaching, and other parts of the Ministerial Office; 3. And we mentioned that which all our ears are witnesses of, that while half the Psalms, and Hymns, etc. are said by such of the people as can say them, the murmur of their voices in most Congregations, is so intelligible and confused, as must hinder the edification of all the rest; For who is edified by that which he cannot understand? we know not what you mean by citing 2 Chron. 7. 1, 4. Ezra 3. 11. where there is not a word of public prayer, but in one place of an Acclamation, upon an extraordinary sight of the Glory of the Lord, which made them praise the Lord, and say, [He is good, for his Mercy is for ever] When the prayer that went before was such as you call [a long tedious prayer] uttered by Solomon alone without such breaks, and discants; And in the other places is no mention of prayer at all, but of singing praise, and that not by the people, but by the Priests, and Levites, saying the same words [for he is good, for his Mercy endures for ever towards Israel.] The people are said to do no more than shout with a great shout, because the foundation of the house was laid: and if shouting be it that you would prove, it's not the thing in question. Let the ordinary mode of praying in Scripture be observed, in the Prayers of David, Solomon, Ezra, Daniel, or any other, and if they were by breaks, and frequent beginnings and end, and alternate interlocutions of the people, as yours are, than we will conform to your mode, which now offends us; But if they were not, we beseech you reduce yours to the examples in the Scripture: we desire no other rule to decide the Controversy by. As to your Citation, 1 Socrat. there tells us of the alternate singing of the Aruians in the reproach of the Orthodox, and that chrysostom (not a Synod) compiled Hymns to be sung in opposition to them in the streets, which came in the end to a Tumult and Bloodshed. And hereupon he tells us of the original of alternate singing. viz. a pretended vision of Ignatius, that heard Angels sing in that order. And what is all this to alternate reading, and praying, or to a Divine Institution, when here is no mention of reading, or praying, but of singing Hymns? And that not upon pretence of Apostolical Tradition, but a vision of uncertain credit. Theodor. also speaketh only of singing Psalms alternately, and not a word of reading or praying so; And he fetcheth that way of singing also as Socrat. doth, but from the Church at Antioch, and not from any pretended doctrine, or practise of the Apostles; And neither of them speaks a word of the necessity of it, or of forcing any to it, so that all these your Citations, speaking not a word so much as of the very Subjects in question, are marvellously impertinent. The words [their Worship] seem to intimate, that singing Psalms is part (of our Worship) and not of yours, we hope you disown it not; for our parts we are not ashamed of it, your distinction between Hopkin's and David's Psalms, as if the Metre allowed by Authority to be sung in Churches made them to be no more David's Psalms, seemeth to us a very hard saying. If it be because it is a Translation, than the Prose should be none of David's Psalms neither, nor any Translation be the Scripture. If it be because it is in Metre, than the exactest Translation in Metre should be none of the Scripture. If because it's done imperfectly, than the old Translation of the Bible, used by the Common-Prayer-book, should not be Scripture. As to your reason for the supposed priority, 1. Scripture examples telling us, that the People had more part in the Psalms, than in the Prayers or Readins, satisfy us, that God and his Church then saw a disparity of Reason. 2. Common observation tells us, that there is more Order and less hindrance of Edification in the People's singing, than in their Reading, and Praying together vocally.   

[It is desired that nothing should be in the Liturgy, which so much 
N. 5. Sect. 1.  us seems to countenance the observation of Lent as a religious Fast, and this as an expedient to Peace, which is in effect to desire, that this our Church may be contentious for Peace sake, and to divide from the Church Catholic, that we may live at unity among ourselves: For Saint Paul reckons them amongst the lovers of Contention, who shall oppose themselves against the Custom of the Churches of God; that the religious observation of Lent was a Custom of the Churches of God, appears by the Testimonies following, Chrysost. Ser. 11. in Heb. 10. Cyrill. Catec. mist. 5. St. August. Ep. 119. ut 40. dies ante Pascha observetur, Ecclesiae consuetudo roboravit: and St. Hierom ad Marcell, says, it was secundum traditionem Apostolorum; This Demand then tends not to Peace, but Dissension. The fasting Forty days may be in imitation of our Saviour, for all that is here said to the contrary; for though we cannot arrive to his perfection, abstaining wholly from meat so long, yet we may fast forty days together, either Cornelius his Fast, till three of the Clock afternoon, or Saint Peter 's fast till noon, or at least Daniel 's fast, abstaining from Meats and Drinks of delight, and thus far imitate our lord]   

Reply. If we had said, that the Church is contentious, if it adore God in kneeling on the Lords days, or use not the White Garment, Milk and Honey after baptism, which had more pretence of Apostolical tradition, and were generally used more anciently than Lent, would you not have thought we wronged the Church? if the purer times of the Church have one Custom, and later times a contrary, which must we follow? or must we necessarily be contentious for not following both? or rather may we not by the example of the Church that changeth them, be allowed to take such things to be matters of Liberty, and not necessity? If we must needs conform to the Custom of other Churches in such things, or be contentious, it is either because God hath so commanded, or because he hath given those Church's Authority to command it: If the former, than what Churches or what Ages must we conform to? If all must concur to be our pattern, it will be hard for us to be acquainted with them so far as to know of such Concurrences: And in our Case we know that many do it not; If it must be the most, we would know where God commandeth us to imitate the greater number, though the worse; or hath secured us that they shall not be the worst? or why we are not tied rather to imitate the purer Ages than the more corrupt? If it be said, that the Church hath Authority to command us, we desire to know what Church that is, and where to be found, and heard, that may command England, and all the Churches of his Majesty's Dominions. If it be said to be a General Council; 1. No General Council can pretend to more Authority than that of Nice, whose 20th Canon, backed with Tradition and common pratice, now binds not us, and was laid by without any Repeal by following Councils. 2. We know of no such things as General Councils, at least that have bound us to the religious observation of Lent. The Bishops of one Empire could not make a General Council. 3. Nor do we know of any such power that they have ever the universal Church, there being no visible head of it, or Governors to make universal Laws, but Christ, (as Rogers on the 20. Article forecited shows) our 21. Article saith that [General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes] and doubtless all the Heathen, and Mahomitans, and all the contending Christian Princes, will never agree together, (nor never did) to let all their Christian Subjects concur to hold a General Council. It saith also [and when they be gathered together (forasmuch as they be an Assembly of men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God) they may err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto God; therefore things ordained by them, as necessary to Salvation, have neither strength nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scriptures;] And if they may err in things pertaining unto God, and ordained by them as necessary to Salvation] much more in lesser things. And are we contentious if we err not with them? Our. 39 Article determineth this Controversy, saying, [It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one, or utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and changed according to the diversity of Countries, times, and men's manners, so that nothing be ordained against God's Word.] And after [every particular, or national Church, hath authority to ordain, change, or abolish Ceremonies, or Rites of the Church, ordained only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying] they that believe not this, should not subscribe it, nor require it of others. As for the Testimonies cited by you, they are to little purpose: We deny not that the Custom of observing Lent, either fewer days or more, was as Ancient as those Authors. But 1. That Lent was not known or kept in the 2d. or 3d. Ages, you may see as followeth, Tertul. de jejun. l. 2. cap. 14. pleading for the Montanists, [Si omnem in totum devotionem temporum, & dierum, & mensium, & annorum erasit Apostolus, cur Pascha celeramus anno circulo in mense primo? cur quodragin●a inde diebus in omni exultatione decurrimus? cur stationibus quartam & sextam, sabbati dicamus? & jejunits Parasceven? quanquam vos etiam sabbatum si quando continuatis; nunquam risi in Pascha jejunandum, etc. And cap. 15. excusing that rigour of their Fasts [quontula est apud ncs interdictio ciborum, duus in anno. Hebdomadas xerophagiarum nec totas; excaptis scilicet sabbatis, & dominicis offerimus Deo; The old general Fast at that time was only the voluntary unconstrained fasting on Good Friday, & after that on one or two days more, and then on six; Iraeneus in a fragment of an Epist. in Euseb. Hist. lib. 5. cap. 26. Gr. Lat. 23. saith, (the Controversy is not only of the day of Easter, but of the kind of Fast itself: for some think they should fast one day, some two, others more, some measure their day by 40. hours of day and night; and this variety of those that observe these Fasts began not now in our Age, but long before us with our Ancestors, who as is most like, propagated to posterity the Custom which they retain, as brought in by a certain simplicity, and private will; And yet all these lived peaceably among themselves, and we keep peace among ourselves, and the difference of Fasting is so far from violating the consonancy of Faith, as that it even commendeth it.] Thus Iraeneus, (read the rest of the Chapter) thus is the true reading confessed by Bellarmine, Rigaltius, etc. and Dionis. Alexand. Ep. Can. ad Basil. pag. 881. Balsam. saith, [nor do all equally and alike sustain those six days of Fasting; but some pass them all Fasting, some two, somethree, some four, some more;] And the Catholics in Tert. de jejun, cap. 2. say, neque de caetero differentur jejunandum, ex arbitrio, non ex imperio nova disciplinae, pro temporibus & causis uniuscujusque sic & Apostolos observasse, nullum aliud imponentes jugum certorum, & in common omnibus obeundorum jejuniorum; And Socrat. admireth at many Countries, that all differed about the number of days, and yet all called it Quadragesima, lib. 5. c. 22. Eat. Gr. 21. So Sozomen lib. 7. c. 19 Gr. & Niceph. lib. 12. cap. 34. which may help you to expound Hierom, and the rest cited by you, as Rigalitus doth ad Tertul. de jejun. 128. as showing that they did it with respect to Christ's 40. days fast, but not as intending any such thing themselves as any fast of 40. days. It is against the Montanists, that the Quadrages. was but once a year that Hierom useth the title of Apostolic tradition. And how to expound him, see Epist. ad Lucin. [u●aqueque provincia abundet in suo sensu, & precepta Majorum leges Apostolicus arbitictur;] But saith August. ad Casulan. Ep. 86. [In Evangelicis & Apostolicis literis, totoque Instrumento quod appellatur Testamentum Novum, animo id revolens video preceptum esse jejunium: quibus autem diebus non oportet jejunare, & quibus oporteas, precepto Domini vel Apostolorum non invenio definitum.] And that Christ ans abstinence in Lent was voluntary [quanto magis quisque vel minus voluerit, vel potuerit.] August. affirmeth, cont. Faustum Manich. lib. 30. cap. 5. And Soerat. ubi supr. saith. [ac quontam nemo de eâre praeceptum literarum monumentis proditam potest ostendete, perspicuum est Apostolos liberam potestatem in eadem cujusque menti, ac arbitrio permississe: ut quisque nec metu, nec necessitate inductus quod bonum sit ageret.] And Prosper de vit. Contempl. li. 2. C. 24 veruntamen sic jejunare, vel abstinere debemus ut nos non jejunandi, vel abstinendi necessitate subdamus, ne jam deveti, sed inviti, rem voluntariam faciamus.] And Cossianus, lib. 2. col. 21. cap. 30. saith in primitiuâ ecclesiâ equale fuisse jejunium per totum annum: Ac frigescente devotione, cum negligerentur jejunia inductum Quadragiâ Sacer dotibus. But when you come to describe your fast, you make amends for the length, by making it indeed no fast; To abstain from meats and drinks of delight,] where neither the thing, not the delight, is profitable to further us in our duty to God, is that which we take to be the duty of every Christian all the year, as being a part of our mortification, and self denial, who are commanded to Crucify the flesh, and to make no provision to satisfy the lusts of it, and to subdue our bodies; But when those meats and drinks, do more help than hinder us in the service of God, we take it to be our duty to use them, unless when some other accident forbids it, that would make it otherwise more hurtful; And for fasting till noon, we suppose it is the ordinary way of diet to multitudes of Sedentary persons, both Students, and Tradesmen, that find one meal a day sufficient for nature: If you call this fasting, your poor Brethren fast all their life time, and never knew that it was fasting; But to command hard Labourers to do so, is but to make it a fault to have health, or to do their necessary work. We beseech you bring not the Clergy under the suspicion of Gluttony, by calling our ordinary wholesome temperance by the name of fasting: sure Princes may feed as fully and delightfully as we; yet Solomon saith [woe to thee O Land when thy King is a Child, and thy Princes eat in the morning; Blessed art thou O Land when thy King is the Son of Nobles, and thy Princes eat in due season, for strength, & not for drunkenness: For mere sensual delight it is never lawful; And when it is for strength it is not to be forbidden, unless when by accident it will infer a greater good to abstain, Eccl. 20. 16. 17. so Prov. 31. 4. 6. It is not for Kings to drink wine, not for Princes strong drink; give strong drink to him that is ready to perish, and wine to those that be of heavy hearts.]   

[Nor does the Act of Parliament 5 Elizab. forbid it, we dare not think a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded; Nor does the Act determine any thing about Lent Fast, but only provide for the maintenance of the Navy, and of Fishing in order thereunto, as is plain by the Act. Besides we conceive that we must not so interpret, one Act, as to contradict another, being still in force and unrepealed. Now the Act of 1 Eliz. confirms the whole Liturgy, and in that the religious keeping of Lent, with a severe penalty upon all those, who shall by open words speak any thing in derogation of any part thereof, and therefore that other Act of 5 Elizab. must not be interpreted to forbid the religious keeping of Lent.]   

Reply. If when the express words of a Statute are cited, you can so easily put it off, by saying (it does not forbid it,) and you dare not think that a Parliament did intend to forbid that which Christ his Church hath commanded,) and (you must not interpret it as contradicting that Act which confirms the Liturgy,) we must think that indeed we are no less regardful of the Laws of the Governors than you; But first, we understand not what Authority this is that you set against the King and Parliament, as supposing they will not forbid what it commands? You call it Christ's Church, we suppose you mean not Christ himself, by his Apostles infallibly directed and inspired: If it be the National Church of England, they are the King's Subjects; and why may he not forbid a Ceremony which they command; or why should they command it if he forbid it? If it be any Foreign Church, there's none hath power over us. If it be any pretended head of the Church universal, whether Pope or general Council, having power to make Laws that bind the whole Church, it is a thing so copiously disproved by Protestants against both the Italian and French Papists, that we think it needless to confute it, nor indeed dare imagine that you intent it. We know not the refore what you mean; But whatever you mean you seem to contradict the forecited Article of the Church of England, that makes all humane Laws about Rites and Ceremonies of the Church to be unchangeable, by each particular National Church; And that it is not necessary that Ceremonies or Traditions be in all places one, or utterly like▪ we most earnestly beseech you be cautious how you obtrude upon us a Foreign Power, under the name of Christ's Church, that may command Ceremonies which King and Parliament may not forbid, whether it be one man or a thousand, we fear it is against our Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy, for us do own any such Power. And (not presuming upon any immodest challenge) we are ready in the defence of those Oaths, and the Protestant Religion, to prove against any in an equal conference, that there is no such Power, and for the Statute, let the words themselves decide the Controversy, which are these [Be it Enacted that who soever shall by Preaching, Teaching, Writing, or open speech, notify that any eating of Fish, or forbearing of Flesh, mentioned in this Statuie, is of any necessity for the saving of the Soul of man, or that it is the Service of God, otherwise than as other Politic Laws are, and be, that than such persons are and shall be punished, as the spreaders of false news are, and aught to be.] And whereas you say the Act determines not any thing about Lent Fast, it speaks against eating Flesh, (on any days now usually observed as Fish days: and Lent is such, and the senfe of the Act for the Lituigy may better be tried by this, which is plain, than thus reduced to that which is more obscure.   

[The observation of Saints days, is not as of Divine, but Ecclesiastical Institution, and therefore it is not necessary that they should have 
N. 6.  any other ground in Scripture, than all other Institutions of the same nature, so that they be agreeable to the Scriptare in the general end, for the promoting piety, and the observation of them was ancient, as appears by the Rituals, and Liturgies, and by the joint consent of Antiquity, and by the ancient translation of the Bible, as the Syriack and Ethiopick, where the Lessons appointed for Holidays, are noted and set down, the former of which was made near the Apostles times, Besides our Saviour himself, kept a Feast of the Church's Institution, viz. the Feast of the Dedication, S. Jo. 12. 22. The choice end of these days being not feasting, but the exercise of Holy Duties, they are fitter called Holidays, than Festivals, and though they be all of like nature, it doth not follow that they are equal; The people may be dispensed with for their work, after the Service, as Authority pleaseth, The other names are left in the Calendar, not that they should be so kept as Holidays, but they are useful for the preservation of their memories, and for other reasons, as for Leases, law-days, etc.]   

Reply. The antiquity of the Translations mentioned is far from being of determinate certainty: we rather wish than hope that the Syriack could be proved to be made near the Apostles times; But however, the things being confessed of humane Institution, and no Foreign Power having any Authority to command his Majesty's Subjects, and so the imposition being only by our own Governors, we humbly crave that they may be left indifferent, and the unity or peace of the Church, or Liberty of the Ministers not laid upon them.   

[This makes the Liturgy void, if every, Minister may put in, and 
N. 7. S. 1.  leave out all at his discretion.]   

Repl. You mistake us: we speak not of putting in, and leaving out, of the Liturgy, but of having leave to intermix some exhortations or prayers besides, to take off the deadness which will follow, if there be nothing but the stinted Forms; we would avoid both the extreme that would have no forms, and the contrary extremes that would have nothing but forms; But if we can have nothing but extremes, there's no remedy, it's not our fault. And this moderation and mixture which we move for, is so far from making all the Liturgy void, that it will do very much to make it attain its end, and would heal much of the distemper which it occasioneth, and consequently would do much to preserve the reputation of it. As for instance, it besides the Forms in the Liturgy, the Minister might at Baptism, the Lords Supper, Marriage, etc. interpose some suitable exhortation or prayer upon special occasion when he finds it needful. Should you deny this at the visitation of the Sick, it would seem strange, and why may it not be granted at other times: It is a matter of far greater trouble to us, that you would deny us and all Ministers the Liberty of using any other Prayers besides the Liturgy then that you impose these   

[The gift or rather spirit of Prayer consists in the inward graces of the spirit, not in ex tempore expressions, which any man of natural 
S. 2.  parts, having a voluable tongue, and audacity, may attain to without any special gift.]   

Repl. All inward Graces of the spirit, are not properly called the spirit of Prayer, nor is the spirit of Prayer that gift of Prayer which we speak of; Nor did we call it by the name of a special gift,) nor did we deny that ordinary men of natural parts and voluable tongues may attain it; But yet we humbly conceive that as there is a gift of Preaching, so also of Prayer, which God bestows in the use of means, diversified much according to men's natural parts, & their diligence, as other acquired abilities are, but also much depending on that grace that is indeed special, which maketh men love and relish the holy subjects of such spiritual studies, and the holy exercise of those Graces that are the soul of Prayer, and consequently making men follow on such exercises with delight and diligence, and therefore with success; And also God is free in giving, or denying his blessing to man's endeavours. If you think there be no Gift of Preaching, you will too dishonourably levelly the Ministry: If Reading be all the Gift of Prayer or Preaching, there needs no great understanding or learning to it. Nor should Cobblers and Tinkers be so unfit men for Ministers as they are thought; Nor would the reason be very apparent, why a Woman might not speak by Preaching, or praying in the Church.   

[But if there be any such Gift as is pretended, it is to be subject to 
4. 3.  the Prophets, and to the Order of the Church.]   

Repl. The Text speaks (as Dr. Hammond well shows) of a subjection to that Prophet himself, who was the Speaker; Inspiration excluded not the prudent exercise of Reason; But it is a strange ordering, that totally excludeth the thing ordered. The Gift of Preaching (as distinct from reading) is to be orderly and with due subjection exercised; But not to be on that pretence extinguished and cast out of the Church: And indeed if you should command it, you are not to be obeyed, whatever we suffer; And why then should the Gift of Prayer (distinct from reading) be cast out.   

[The mischiefs that come by Idle, Impertinent, Ridiculous, sometimes 
§. 4.  Seditious, Impious, and Blasphemous expressions under pretence of the Gift, to the dishonour of God, and scorn of Religion, being far greater than the pretended good of exercising the Gift: It is fit that they who desire such liberty in public devotions, should first give the Church security, that no private opinions; should be put into their Prayers, as is desired in the first Proposal, and that nothing contrary to the Faith should be uttered before God, or offered up to him in the Church.]   

Repl. The mischiefs which you pretend, are Inconveniencies attending humane Imperfection, which you would cure with a mischief; Your Argument from the abuse against the use is a palpable Fallacy, which cast out Physicians in some Countries, and rooted up Vines in others, and condemneth the reading of the Scriptures in a known. Tongue among the Papists; If the Apostles (that complained then so much of Divisions, and preaching false Doctrines, and in envy and strife, etc.) had thought the way of Cure had been, in sending Ministers about the world, with a Prayer-book, and Sermon-book, and to have tied them only to read either one or both of these, no doubt but they would have been so regardful of the Church, as to have composed such a Prayer-book, or Sermon-book themselves, and not jest us to the uncertainties of an Authority not infallible, nor to the Divisions that follow the Impositions of a questionable power, or that which unquestionably is not Universal, and therefore can procure no universal Concord. If one man among you draw up a form of Prayer, it is his single conception: And why a man as learned and able may not be trusted to conceive a Prayer, for the use of a single Congregation, without the dangers mentioned by you, as one man to conceive a Prayer for all the Churches in a Diocese or a Nation? we know not; These words (That the mischief is greater than the pretended good) seem to express an unjust Accusation, of ordinary conceived prayer, and a great undervaluing of the benefits: If you would intimate that the Crimes expressed by you are ordinarily found in Ministers prayers, we that hear so much more frequently than you, must profess we have not found it so (allowing men their different measures of Exactness, as you have even in writing) Nay to the praise of God we must say, that multitudes of private men can ordinarily pray without any such Imperfection, as should nauseate a sober person, and with such seriousness, and aptness of Expression as is greatly to the benefit and comfort of ourselves, when we join with them; And if such general Accusations may serve in a matter of public, and common fact, there is no way for the Justification of the Innocent. And that it is no such common guilt, will seem more probable to them that consider, that such conceived Prayers, both prepared and extemperate, have been ordinarily used in the Pulpits in England, and Scotland, before our days till now, and there hath been power enough in the Bishops and others, before the Wars, to punish those that speak Ridiculously, Seditiously, Impiously, or Blasphemously; And yet so few are the Instances (even when jealousy was most busy) of Ministers punished, or once accused of any such fault in Prayer, as that we find it not easy to remember any considerable number of them: There being great numbers punished for not reading the Book, for playing on the Lords days, or for preaching too oft, and such like, for one that was ever questioned for such kind of praying. And the former showed that it was not for want of will to be severe, that they spared them as to the latter. And if it be but few that are guilty of any intolerable faults of that nature in their Prayers, we hope you will not go on to believe, that the mischiefs that come by the failings of those few, are far greater than the benefit of conceived prayer by all others. We presume not to make our Experiences, the measure of yours, or of other men's. You may tell us what doth most good, or hurt to yourselves, and those that have so communicated their Experiences to you; But we also may speak our own, and theirs that have discovered them to us. And we must seriously profess, that we have found far more benefit to ourselves, and to our Congregations (as far as our Conference, and Converse with them, and our observation of the effects alloweth us to discern) by conceived Prayers, than by the Common-Prayer-book, We find that the benefit of conceived Prayer is to keep the mind in serious Employment, and to awaken the affections, and to make us fervent, and importunate, And the Inconvenience is that some weak men are apt as in Preaching and Conference, so in Prayer to show their weakness, by some unapt Expressions, or disorder, Which is an evil no way to be compared, with the forementioned. good, considering that it is but in the weak, and that if that weakness be so great as to require it, forms may be imposed on those few, without imposing them on all for their sakes (as we force not all to use Spectacles, or Crutches, because some are purblind or lame) and considering that God heareth not Prayers, for the Rhetoric, and handsome Cadencies, and neatness of Expression, but will bear more with some Incuriosity of words (which yet we plead not for) than with an hypocritical, formal heartless, lip-service; For he knoweth the meaning of the Spirit even in the groans, which are not uttered in words; And for the Common-Prayer our Observation telleth us, that though some can use it judiciously, seriously, and we doubt not profitably, yet as to the most of the vulgar, it occasioneth a relaxing of their attention, and intention, and a lazy taking up with a Corpse, or Image of devotion, even the service of the lips, while the heart is little sensible of what is said. And had we not known it we should have thought it incredible, how, utterly ignorant abundance are of the sense of the words which they hear, and repeat themselves from day to day even about Christ himself, and the Essentials of Christianity. It is wonderful to us to observe that rational Creatures can so commonly separate the words from all the sense and life, so great a help or hindrance even to the understanding, is the awakening or not awakening of the Affections about the things of God; And we have already showed you many unfit Expressions in the Common-Prayer-book, especially in the Epistles and Gospels, through the faultiness of your Translations, as Eph. 3. 15. (Father of all, that is called, Father in Heaven and Earth) And that Christ was found in his Apparel as a man) That Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia, and bordereth upon the City now called Jerusalem) Gal. 4. 25. (This is the Sixth Month which is called Barren) Luke 1. (And when men be drunk) John 2. with many such like, which are parts of your public worship; And would you have us hence conclude, that the mischiefs of such Expressions are worse, than all the benefits of that worship: And yet there is this difference in the Cases, that weak & rash Ministers were but here and there one; But the Common-Prayer is the service of every Church, and every day had we heard any in extemporary Prayer use such unmeet Expressions, we should have thought him worthy of sharp reprehension, yea though he had been of the younger or weaker sort; Divers other unfit Expressions, are mentioned in the Exceptions of the late Archbishop of York, and Primate of Ireland, and others (before spoken of) And there is much in the prejudice or diseased Curiosity of some hearers, to make words seem Idle, Impertinent, or Ridiculous which are not so (and which perhaps they understand not) some thought so of the inserting in the late Prayer-book, the private opinion of the Souls departed praying for us; and our praying for the benefit of their prayers; As for the security which you call for, (though (as is showed) you have given us none at all against such errors in your forms, yet) we have before showed you, that you have as much as among imperfect men can be expected: The same that you have, that Physicians shall not murder men, and that Lawyers and Judges shall not undo men, and that your pilot shall not cast away the ship, you have the power in your hands of taking or refusing as they please or displease you, and of judging them by a known Law for their proved miscarriages, according to the quality of them, and what would you have more.   

[To prevent which mischief the former Ages know no better way, 
§. 5.  than to forbid any Prayers in public, but such as were prescribed by public Authority: Con. Carthag. Can. 106. Milen. Can. 12.]   

Repl. To what you allege out of two Councils, we answer, 1. The Acts of more venerable Councils are not now at all observed (as Nice 1. Can. ult. etc.) nor many of these same which you cite. 2. The Scripture, and the constant practice of the more ancient Church allowed what they forbid. 3. Even these Canons show that then the Churches thought not our Liturgy to be necessary to their Concord: Nor indeed had then any such form imposed on all, or many Churches to that end. For the Can. of Counc. Carth.) we suppose you meant Council 3. Can. 23.) mentioneth Prayers even at the Altar, and alloweth any man to describe and use his own Prayers, so he do but first, cum instructionibus fratribus eas confer, Take advice about them with the abler Brethren. If there had been a stated form before imposed on the Churches, what room could there be for this course. And even this much seems but a Caution, made newly upon some late abuse of Prayer. The same we may say the Concil. Male Can. 12.: If they were but a prudentioribus tractata, vel comprobata in Synodo, new Prayers might by any man at any time be brought in, which showeth they had no such stated public Liturgy as is now pleaded for. And even this seemeth occasioned by Pelagianism, which by this Caution they would keep out.  
We hope your omission of our 8th. desire (for the use of the new Translation) intimateth your grant that it shall be so; But we marvel then that we find among your Concessions, the alteration of no part but the Epistles and Gospels.   

[As they would have no Saints days observed by the Church, so no 
N. 9  Apocryphal Chapter read in the Church, but upon such a reason, as would exclude all Sermons, as well as Apocryphas, viz. because the holy Scriptures contain in them all things necessary either in Doctrine to be believed, or in duty to be practised; if so, why so many unnecessary Sermons? why any more but reading of Scriptures? If notwithstanding their sufficiency, Sermons be necessary, there is no reason why these Apocryphal Chapters should not be as useful, most of them containing excellent discourses, and rules of mortality, it is heartily to be wished that Sermons were as good; if their fear be that by this mean● those Books may come to be of equal esteem with the Canon, they may be secured against that by the Title which the Church hath put upon them, calling them Apocryphal, and it is the Church's testimony which teacheth us this difference, and to leave them out, were to cross the practice of the Church in former Ages.]   

Repl. We hoped when our desires were delivered in writing they would have been better observed and understood: We asked not (that no Apocryphal Chapter may be read in the Church,) but that none may be read (as Lessons) for so the Chapters of holy Scripture there read, are called in the Book, and to read them in the same place under the same title, without any sufficient note of distinction, or notice given to the people that they are not Canonical Scripture, they being also bound with our Bibles) is such a temptation to the vulgar to take them for God's Word, as doth much prevail, and is like to do so still. And when Papists second it with their confident affirmations, that the Apocryphal Books are Canonical, well refelled by one of you, the R. Reverend Bishop of Durham,) we should not needlessly help on their success. If you cite the Apocryphas as you do other humane writings, or read them as Homilies, (when and where there is reason to read such) we speak not against it,) to say that the people are secured by the Churches calling them Apocryphas, is of no force, till experience be proved to be dis-regardable, and till you have proved that the Ministers is to tell the people at the reading of every such Chapter that it is but Apocryphal, and that the people all understand Greek so well as to know what Apocryphas signifieth. The more sacred and honourable are these Dictates of the holy Ghost recorded in Scripture, the greater is the sin, by reading the Apocryphas, without sufficient distinction to make the people believe that the writings of man are the Revelation and Laws of God; And also we speak against the reading of the Apocryphas, as it excludeth much of the Canonical Scriptures, and taketh in such Books in their stead, as are commonly reputed fabulous. By this much you may see how you lost your Answer by mistaking us, and how much you will sin against God, and the Church, by denying our desire.   

[That the Minister should not read the Communion Service at the 
N. 10.  Communion Table, is not reasonable to demand, since all the Primitive Church used it, and if we do not observe that golden Rule, of the venerable Council of Nice, Let ancient customs prevail, till reason plainly requires the contrary: We shall give offence to sober Christians by a causeless departure from Catholic usage, and a great advantage to enemies of our Church, than our Brethren I hope would willingly grant, The Priest standing at the Communion Table, seemeth to give us an invitation to the holy Sacrament, and minds us of our duty, viz. To receive the holy Communion, some at least every Sunday, and though we neglect our duty, it is fit the Church should keep her standing.]   

Repl. We doubt not but one place in itself is as lawful as another, but when you make such differences as have misleading intimations, we desire it may be forborn. That all the Primitive Church used when there was no Communion in the Sacrament, to say Service at the Communion Table, is a crude assertion, that must have better proof before we take it for convincing, and it is not probable, because they had a Communion every Lord's day: And if this be not your meaning, you say nothing to the purpose: To prove that they used it when there was none; And you yourselves devise many things more universally practised than this can at all be fairly pretended to have been. The Council of Nice gives no such golden Rule as you mention; A Rule is a general appliable to particular Cases, the Council only speaks of one particular; Let the ancient Custom continue in Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis, that the Bishop of Alexandria have the power of them all;) The Council here confirmeth this particular Custom, but doth not determine in general of the Authority of Custom. That this should be called a Catholic usage shows us how partially the word (Catholic) is sometimes taken. And that this much cannot be granted, as lest we advantage the enemies of the Church, doth make us wonder whom you take for its enemies, and what is that advantage which this will give them; But we thank you that here we find ourselves called Brethren, when before we are not so much as spoken to, but your speech is directed to some other (we know not whom) concerning us, your reason is that which is our reason to the contrary, you say (The Priest standing at the Communion Table seems to give us an Invitation to the holy Communion, etc.) what when there is no Sacrament by himself or us intended? no warning of any given? no Bread and Wine prepared? Be not deceived, God is not mocked. Therefore we desire that there may be no such service at the Table when no Communion is intended, because we would not have such gross dissimulation used in so holy things, as thereby to seem (as you say) to invite Guests when the Feast is not prepared, and if they came we would turn them empty away. Indeed if it were to be a private Mass, and the Priest were to receive alone for want of Company, and it were really desired that the people should come, it were another matter; Moreover there is no Rubric requiring this service at the Table.   

[It is not reasonable that the word Minister should be only 
N. 11.  used in the Liturgy, for since some parts of the Liturgy may be performed by a Deacon, others by none under the Order of a Priest, viz. Absolution, Consecration, it is fit that some such word as Priest, should be used for those Offices, and not Minister, which signifies at large every one that ministers in that holy Office, of what Order soever he be; The word Curate signifying properly all those who are trusted by the Bishops, with Cure of Souls, as anciently it signified, is a very fit word to be used, and can offend no sober person. The word Sunday is ancient. Just. Mart. Ap. 2. And therefore not to be left off.]   

Repl. The word (Minister) may well be used in stead of Priest and Curates,, though the word (Deacon) for necessary distinction stand; yet we doubt not but (Priest) as it is but the English of Presbyter) is lawful; But it is from the common danger of mistake, and abuse that we argue. That all Pastors else are but the Bishop's Curates, is a Doctrine that declares, the heavy charge and account of the Bishops, and tends much to the ease of the Presbyters minds if it could be proved. If by (Curates) you mean such as have not directly by divine Obligation the Cure of Souls, but only by the Bishop's Delegation.) But if the Office of a Presbyter be not of divine Right, and so if they be not the Curates of Christ, and Pastors of the Church, none are; And for the ancient use of it, we find not that it was so from the beginning: And as there's difference, between the ancient Bishops of one single Church and a Diocesan that hath many hundred, so is there between their Curates. But why will you not yield so much, as to change the word (Sunday) into the (Lords Day) when you know that the latter is the name used by the Holy Ghost in Scripture, and commonly by the ancient Writers of the Church, and more becoming Christians. Just. Mart. speaking to Infidels, tells how they called the Day, and not how Christians called it; All he saith is that on Sunday, that is so called by Heathens, the Christians hold their meetings. See the usage of the Church in this point in August. Cont. Faustum Manithaeum. Lib. 18. Cap. 5.   

[Singing of Psalms in Meeter is no part of the Liturgy, and so 
N. 1●.  no part of our Commission.]   

Repl. If the word Liturgy signify the public Worship, God forbid we should exclude the singing of Psalms: And sure you have no fitter way of singing than in Meeter) when these and all Prayers conceived by private men (as you call the Pastors) whether prepared or excemporate, (and by purity of reason-preaching) are cast out, what will your Liturgy be? We hope you make no question, whether singing Psalms, and Hymns were part of the Primitive Liturgy, and seeing they are set forth, and allowed to be sung in all Churches of all the people together) why should they be denied to be part of the Liturgy; we understand not the reason of this [N. 13. 14.] The 13. and 14. we suppose you grant by passing them by.   

[The phrase is such, etc.] The Church in her Prayers useth no more offensive phrase, than St. Paul uses, when he writes to the 
N. 17.  Corinthians, Galathians, and others, calling them in general the Churches of God, Sanctified in Christ Jesus, by vocation Saints, amongst whom notwithstanding there were many, who by their known sins (which the Apostle endeavoured to amend in them) were not properly such, yet he gives the denomination to the whole, from the greater part, to whom in charity it was due. And puts the rest in mind what they have by their Baptism undertaken to be, and what they profess themselves to be, and our prayers and the phrase of them, surely supposes no more than that they are Saints by calling, sanctified in Christ Jesus, by their Baptism admitted into Christ's Congregation, and so to be reckoned members of that Soeiety, till either they shall separate themselves by wilful Schism, or be separated by legal Excommunication, which they seem earnestly to desire, and so do we.]   

Repl. But is there not a very great difference between the Titles, given to the whole Church (as you say from the greater part; as the truth is from the better part, though it were the less) and the Titles given to Individual members, where there is no such reason? we call the Field a Corn field, though there be much Tares in it, because of the better part, which denominateth: But we will not call every one of these Tares by the name of Corn. when we speak of the Church, we will call it holy, as Paul doth: But when we speak to Simon Magus, we will not call him holy, but say (Thou art in the gall of bitterness, and the bond of Iniquity, and hast no part or lot in this matter, etc.) We will not persuade the people that every notorious Drunkard, Fornicator, Worldling, etc. that is buried as a Brother, of whose Resurtection to life Eternal, we have sure and certain hope, and all because you will not Excommunicate them. We are glad to hear of your desire of such Discipline: But when shall we see more than desire: and the edge of it be turned from those that fear sinning, to those that fear it not.   

[The Connexion of the parts of our Liturgy is conformable to the Example of the Churches of God before us, and have as much dependence 
N. 16. §. 1.  as is usually to be seen in many petitions of the same Psalm, and we conceive the Order and Method to be excellent and must do so till they tell us what that Order is which Prayers ought to have, which is not done here.]   

Repl. There are two Rules of Prayer, one is the nature of the things, compared (in matter and order) with nature and necessity: The other is the revealed will of God in his word: In general the holy Scripture; more especially the Lords Prayer: The Liturgy (for the greatest part of the Prayers for daily use) is confused, by which soever of those you measure it; You seem much to honour the Lords Prayer, by your frequent use of it (or part of it) we beseech you dishonour it not practically by denying it for matter, and order to be the only ordinary perfect Rule we know about particular Administrations, when it is but certain select requests that we are to put up, suited to the particular subject, and occasion, we cannot follow the whole method of the Lords Prayer, which containeth the heads of all the parts; where we are not to take in all the parts, we cannot take them in that order; But that none of all your Prayers should be form to the perfect Rule, that your Let any which is the comprehensive Prayer, and that the body of your daily Prayers (broken into several Collects) should not (as set together,) have any considerable respect unto that order, nor yet to the order which reason and the nature of the thing requireth, which is observed in all things else, and yet that you should admire this, and be so tenacious of that, which in conceived Prayer you would call by worse names than confusions, this shows us the wonderful power of prejudice; We were thus brief in this exception, lest we should offend by instances: But seeing you conceive the order and method to be excellent, and to be willing to hear more, as to this and the following exception, we shall annex a Catalogue of defects, and disorders, which we before forbore to give you: The Psalms have ordinarily an observabe method: If you find any whose parts you cannot so well set together, as to see the beauty of method, will you turn your eye from the rest, and from the Lords Prayer, and choose that one to be your Precedent! or excuse disorder on that pretence.   

[The Collects are made short as being best for devotion as we observed before, and cannot be accounted faulty, for being like those 
●● §  short but prevalent Prayers in Scripture; Lord be merciful to me a Sinner; Son of David have mercy on us; Lord increase our Faith.]   

Repl. We do in common speech call that a Prayer, which containeth all the substance of what in that business and address we have to say unto God, and that a Petition which containeth one single request; usually a Prayer hath many Petitions. Now if you intent in your address to God, to do no more than speak a transient request or ejaculation (which we may do in the midst of other business) then indeed your instances are pertinent. But why then do you not give over when you seem to have done, but come again and again and offer as many Prayers, almost as Petitions. This is to make the Prayer short, (as a Sermon is that is cut into single Sentences, every Sentence having an exordium, and Epilogue as a Sermon,) but it is to make the Prayers much longer than is needful or suitable to the matter; Do you find this the way of the Saints in Scripture? Indeed Abraham did so, when God's interlocution answering the first Prayer, called him to vary his request, Gen. 18. But that's not our case: The Psalms and Prayers of David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Asa, Ezra, Nehemiah, Daniel, and the other Prophets, of Christ himself, Joh. 17. are usually one continued speech, and not like yours, (as we said before.)   

[Why the repeated mention of the Name and Attributes of God, should not be more pleasing to any godly person, we cannot imagine, or 
§. 3.  what burden it should seem, when David magnified one Attribute of God's mercy, 26. times together. Psal. 36. Nor can we conceive why the Name and merits of Jesus, with which all our Prayers should end, should not be as sweet to us as to former Saints and Martyrs, with which here they complain our Prayers do so frequently end: since the Attributes of God are the ground of our hope, of obtaining all our Petitions such Prefaces of Prayers as are taken from them, though they have no special respect to the Petitions following are not to be termed unsuitable, or said to have fallen rather casually, than orderly.   

Repl. As we took it to be no Controversy between us, whether the mention of God's Name is deservedly sweet to all his Servants; So we thought it was none, that this reverend Name is reverently to be used, and not too lightly, and therefore not with a causeless frequency tossed in men's mouths, even in prayer itself; and that tautologies and vain repetitions, are not the better but the worse, because God's Name is made the matter of them. It is not you that have expressed your offence (as well as we) against those weak Ministers that repeat too frequently the Name and Attributes of God, in their extemporate Prayers? And is it ill in them? and is the same, and much more well in the Common Prayer? O have not the Faith or worship of our glorious God in respect of persons. Let not that be called ridiculous idle, impertinent, or worse in one, which is accounted commendable in others. Do you think it were not a faulty crossing, of the mind and method of Jesus Christ, if you should make 6. Prayers of it he 6. Petitions of the Lords Prayer, and set the Preface and Conclusion unto each? as (Our Father, which art in Heaven, hallowed be thy Name, for thine is the Kingdom, etc. and so over all the rest; Yet we know that the same words may be oft repeated (as David doth Gods enduring mercy,) without such tautological vanity: when it is not from emptiness or neglect of order, or affectation; But in Psalms or Hymns where affections are to be elevated by such figurative elegancies, and strains as are best beseeming Poetry or Rapture, we are not against such repetitions; But if we may (according to the Common-Prayer-book) begin and end, and begin and seem to withdraw again, and make a Prayer of every Petition or two, and begin and end every such petition, with God's name, and Christ's merits, as making up half the form, or near, nothing is an affected empty tossing of God's name in Prayer if this be not: We are persuaded if you should hear a man in a known extemporate prayer do thus, it would seem strange and harsh even to yourselves.   

[There are besides a preparative Exhortation, several preparatory prayers: 1. Despise not O Lord humble and contrite hearts. 
N. 17. §. 1. Exc. 1.  Which is one of the sentences in the Preface; And this, That those things may please him, which we do at this present) at the end of the Absolution: And again immediately after the Lord's Prayer before the Psalmody, O Lord open thou our Lips. etc.]   

Repl. Despise not O Lord humble and contrite hearts) is not prayer, for assistance, and acceptance in that Worship, suited to the duty of a people addressing themselves to God: But it is recited as a Scripture invitation to repentance, and (that those things may please him which we do at this present) are no words of Prayer, but part of an exhortation to the people; (and O Lord open thou our lips) comes after the Exhortation, Confession, Absolution, and Lords Prayer, and ergo, is not in the place of such an Address, as we are speaking of, What will not seem to justify, what we have a mind to justify; and to condemn that which we have a mind to condemn?   

[This which they call a defect, others think they have reason to 
§. 2. Exc. 2.  account the perfection of the Liturgy, the Offices of which being intended for common and general services, would cease to be such, by descending to particulars, as in confession of Sin, while it is general, all persons may and must join in it, since in many things we offend all; But if there be a particular enumeration of sins, it cannot be so general a confession, because it may happen that some or other may by God's Grace have been preserved from some of those sins enumerated, and therefore should by confessing themselves guilty, tell God a Lie, which needs a new Confession.]   

Repl. If general words be its perfection, it's very culpable in tediousness and vain repetitions; For what need you more than (Lord be merciful to us sinners.) There's together a general confession of Sin, and a general Prayer for mercy, which comprehend all the particulars of the people's Sins, and wants. We gave you our reason, which you answer not; Confession is the exercise of Repentance, and also the helper of it; And it is no true repentance which is not particular, but only general. If you say that you repent that you have sinned, and know not where, or do not repent of any particular sin, you do not indeed repent, for Sin is not existent but in the Individuals: And if you ask for grace, and know nor what grace, or desire no particular graces; indeed you desire not grace at all: We know there is time and use for general Confessions, and Requests; But still as implying particulars, as having gone before, or following, or at least it must be supposed, that the people understand the particulars included and have inward confessions and desires of them: Which cannot here be supposed, when they are not all mentioned, not can the people generally be supposed to have such quick and comprehensive minds, nor is there leisure to exercise such particular repentance or desire, while a general is named: And we beseech you let Scripture be Judge, whether the Confessions and Prayers of the Servants of God have not been particular; As to your objection or reason, we answer; 1. There are general Prayers with the particular, or without them. 2, There are particular Confessions and Prayers proper to some few Christians, and there are others common to all; It is these that we expect, and not the former. 3. The Church's Prayers must be suited to the body of the Assembly, though perhaps some one, or few may be in a state not fit for such expressions: What a lamentable Liturgy will you have, if you have nothing in it, but what every one in the Congregation may say as true of and suitable to themselves? Then you must leave out all Thanksgiving for our Justification and forgiveness of sin, and adoption, and title to glory, etc. because many in the Assembly are Hypocrites, and have no such mercies, and many more that are sincere, are mistaken in their own condition, and know not that they have the mercies which they have, and therefore dare not give thanks for them, lest they speak an untruth: Then the Liturgy that now speaks as in the persons of the Sanctified must be changed, that the two forementioned sorts, (or the latter at least) may consent; and when you have done, it will be unsuitable to those that are in a better state, and have the knowledge of their Justification. This is the Argument which the Sectaries used against singing of David's Psalms in the Congregations, because there is much in them, that many cannot truly say of themselves. But the Church must not go out of that way of worship prescribed by God, and suired to the state of the ordinary sort of the spiritual Worshippers, because of the distempers, or the supereminent excellencies of some few: It were easy to go over David's Psalms and your own Liturgy, and show you very much that by this Argument must be cast out: He that finds any passage unsuitable to himself, is not to speak it of himself.   

[As for original sin, though we think it an evil custom springing 
§. 3.  from false Doctrine, to use any such expressions as may lead people to think that to the persons baptised (in whose persons only our Prayers are offered up,) original sin is not forgiven in their holy Baptism; Yet for that there remains in the Regenerate some relics of that which are to be bewailed, the Church in her Confession acknowledgeth such desires of our own hearts as render us miserable by following them; That there is no health in us, That without Gods help our frailty cannot but fall. That our mortal nature can do no good thing without him; which is a clear acknowledgement of Original sin.]   

Repl. 1. He that hath his Original sin forgiven him, may well confess that he was born in iniquity and conceived in sin, and was by nature a Child of wrath, and that by one man sin entered into the world, and that Judgement came on all men to Condemnation, etc. The pardoned may confess what once they were, and from what Rock they were hewn: even actual sins must be confessed, after they are forgiven, (unless the Antimonians hold the truth against us in such points. 2. All is not false Doctrine that crosseth men's private Opinions, which you seem here to obtrude upon us. We know that the Papists (and perhaps some others) hold that all the baptised are delivered from the Gild of Original sin; But (as they are in the dark, and disagreed in the Explicatio of it) so we have more reason to incline to either of the ordinary Opinions of the Protestants, than to this of theirs, 3. Some learned Protestants hold that visibly all the baptised are Church members; pardoned and justified, which is but that they are probably justified indeed, and are to be used by the Church (upon a Judgement of Charity) as those that are really justified. But that we have indeed no certainty that they are so; God keeping that as a secret to himself concerning Individuals, till by actual Faith and Repentance, it be manifest to themselves. Another Opinion of many Protestants is, that all persons that are Children of the Promise, or that have the conditions of pardon and Justification in the Covenant mentioned, are to receive that pardon by Baptism: and all such are pardoned, and certainly in a state of Justification and Salvation thereupon: and that the promise of pardon is made to the Faithful and to their seed: and therefore that all the Faithful and their seed in Infancy have this pardon given them by the promise, and solemnly delivered them, and sealed to them by Baptism, which investeth them in the benefits of the Covenant. But withal that first, the professed Infidel and his seed as such, are not the Children of the promise, and therefore if the Parent ludicruosly or forcedly, or the Child by error be baptised, they have not thereby the pardon of their sin before God. 2. That the Hypocrite that is not a true believer at the heart, though he profess it, hath no pardon by Baptism before God, as being not an heir of the promise, nor yet any Infant of his as such: But though such are not pardoned, the Church that judgeth by profession, taking Professors for Believers, must accordingly use them & their seed, 3. But though the Church judge thus charitably of each Professor in particular, till his hypocrisy be detected, yet doth it understand that hypocrites there are, & still will be in the Church, though we know them not by name. And that therefore there are many externally baptised, and in Communion, that never had the pardon of sin, indeed before God; as not having the Condition of the promise of pardon: Such as Simon Magus was. We have less reason to take this Doctrine for false, than that which pronounceth certain pardon, and salvation to all baptised Infants whatsoever: And were we of their judgement, we should think it the most charitable Act in the world to take the Infants of Heathens, and baptise them; And if any should then dispatch them all to prevent their lapse, they were all certainly saved. We hope by (some relics) you mean that which is truly and properly sin. For our parts we believe according to the ninth Article, that Original sin standeth in the Corruption of the nature of every man, whereby man is far gone from Original righteousness, and inclined to evil; And that this infection of nature doth remain in the Regenerate; And though there is no Condemnation for them that believe and are baptised, yet Concupiscence and Lust, hath of itself the nature of sin.) you say, (The Church acknowledgeth such desires, etc.) Devices, and Desires are Actual sins and not Original, which consisteth in privation, and corrupt inclination: The next words (There is no health in us) it seems the Translators that put it into the Liturgy misunderstood; But however you seem here plainly by your misinterpretation to mis-understand it. Nulla salus in nobis, is spoken actively and not possessively or passively, the plain sense is, that there is no help deliverance and salvation in ourselves: we cannot help ourselves out of this misery, but must have a better Saviour; as Christ is oft called our salvation, so we are denied to be our own: so that yet here is no confession at all of Original sin, but of the effects; The two next sentences confess a debility, and privation, but not that it was ab origine, but may for any thing that's there said be taken to be since contracted; Nor are the words in this Confession, but in some other Collects else where, which proves not that this Confession saith any thing of Original sin.   

[We know not what public prayers are wanting, nor do they tell 
§. 7. Exc. 3.  us, the usual Complaint hath been, that there were too many: Neither do we conceive any want of public Thanksgivings there being in the Liturgy, Te Deum, Benedictus, Magnificat, Benedicite, Glory be to God on high, Therefore with Angels and Arch-Angels, The Doxology, Glory be to the Father, etc. All peculiar as they require, to Gospel worship, and fit to express our thanks and honour to God upon every particular occasion, and occasional Thanksgivings after the Litany, of the frequency whereof themselves elsewhere complain, who here complain of defect; If there he any forms wanting the Church will provide.]   

Repl. We have showed you in the forms which we offered you, what we judge wanting, the Right Reverend Bishop of Exeter hath taken notice of the same want, and proposed a supply, those you name are either but general sentences, or extend but to some few particulars, as being suited to the persons and particular occasions of them, and none save the (Te Deum) designed to be the distinct praise of the Church for the benefits of Redemption, as the suitable and sufficient performance of this great part of the Liturgy; However it will do you no harm that your Brethren be gratified, with fuller expressions and variety. They that have complained of too many (because you shred your Petitions into almost as many Prayers, and so the Thanksgivings into such briefs) yet complained not of too much; But that too many (by the multitudes of Prefaces, and Epilogues) was the the cause of too little.   

[They complain that the Liturgy contains too many Generals, 
§. 5. Exc. 4.  without mention of the particulars, and the Instances are such Petitions as those, That we may do Gods will; To be kept from all evil, almost the very Terms of the Petitions of the Lords Prayer: so that they must reform that, before they can pretend to mend our Liturgy in these Petitions.]   

Repl. We complain not that there are Generals, but that there is nothing but Generals in so great a part of your Prayers and therefore they are very defective: And if really these Generals suffice you, a few lines may serve instead of your whole Book, Instead of all your Confessions, it may serve to say (That we have greatly sinned) and no more: Instead of all your Let any or Deprecations it is enough to say (Deliver us from all evil) Instead of all your Petitions for Grace, Peace, Rain, Fair-weather, Health, etc. it is enough to say (Give us the Good we want) Indeed the Lords Prayer hath general Requests, because it is the design of it, to be a Rule of Prayer, and so contain but the Heads to which all Prayers are to be reduced; But if therefore you will have no more particulars, why do you use any prayer but the Lord's Prayer; We hope you do not think to supply any defects pretended to be found in its Generals, not to correct the order of it; If it be but because you would not on every particular occasion be so long, as to say the whole, you may take that Head. which suiteth that occasion: And so (Give us this day our daily bread) may serve instead of all the Collects for temporal supplies: And all your Offices may be blotted out, and one of the petitions of the Lords prayer placed in the stead of each of them.   

[We have deferred this to the proper place as you might have done.]   

Repl. It was the proper place under the head of defectiveness, 
§. 6. Exc. 5.  to instance in this as well as other defects.   

[We are now come to the main and principal demand as is pretended 
N. 18. §. 1.  viz. The abolishing the Laws which impose any Ceremonies, especially three, the Surplice, the Sign of the Cross, and Kneeling; These are the Yoke which if removed, there might be peace. It is to be suspected, and there is reason for it, from their own words, that somewhat else pinches, and that if these Ceremonies were laid aside and these or any other Prayers strictly enjoined without them, it would be deemed a burden intolerable, it seems so by N. 7. where they desire that when the Liturgy is altered, according to the rest of their proposals, the Minister may have liberty to add, and leave out what he pleases; Yet because the imposition of these Ceremonies is pretended to be the insupportable Grievance, we must of necessity either yield that demand, or show reason why we do not; and that we may proceed the better in this undertaking, we shall reduce the sum of their complaint, to these several heads, as we find them in their Papers; The Law for imposing these Ceremonies, they would have abrogated for these reasons.]   

Repl. To what you object, to intimate your suspicion of us) from N. 7. we have before answered: We must confess the abatement of Ceremonies, with the exclusion of all Prayers, and exhortations, besides what's read will not satisfy us. The liberty which we desired in all the parts of Worship (not to add to the Liturgy, nor take from it) but to interpose upon just occasion, such words of Prayer, or exhortation, as are requisite, and not to be tied at any time to read the whole, we are assured will do much to preserve the Liturgy, and bring it into more profitable use and take off much of men's offence. And pardon us while we tell you this certain truth, that if once it be known that you have a design to work out all Prayers (even those of the Pulpit) except such as you prescribe, it will make many thousand people, fearing God, to be averse to that which else they would have submitted to, and to distaste both your endeavours and ours, as if we were about drawing them into so great a snare. And as the Proverb is; You may as well think to make a Coat for the Moon, as to make a Liturgy that shall be sufficiently suited to the variety of places, times, subjects, accidents, without the Liberty of intermixing such Prayers or exhortations, as alterations and diversities require.   

[1. It is doubtful whether God hath given power to men to impose 
§. 2.  such signified signs, which though they call them significant, yet have in them no real goodness, in the judgement of the Imposers themselves, being called by them things indifferent, and therefore 
Cor. 11.  fall not under St. Paul's rule of Omnia Decenter, nor are suitable to the simplicity of the Gospel Worship.  
2. Because it is a violation of the Royalty of Christ, and an impeachment 
2.  of his Laws as unsufficient, and so those that are under the 
See Hooker li. 3. Sect. 4.  Law of Deut. 12. Whatsoever I command you, observe to do, you shall take nothing from it, nor add any thing to it; You do not observe these.  
3. Because sundry learned pious, and Orthodox men, have ever since the Reformation judged them unwarrantable, and we ought to 
3.  be as our Lord was, tender of weak Brethren, not to offend his little ones, nor to lay a stumbling-black before a weak Brother.  
4. Because these Ceremonies have been the fountain of many evils 
4.  in this Church and Nation, occasioning sad divisions betwixt Minister, & Minister; betwixt Minister and People, exposing many 
See Hookli. 4, Sect. 1.  Orthodox Preachers to the displeasure of Rulers; And no other fruits than these can be looked for from the retaining these Ceremonies.   

Repl. We had rather you had taken our Reasons as we laid them down, than to have so altered them; Ergo having told you that some hold them unlawful, and others inconvenient, etc. and desired that they may not be imposed on such, who judge such Impositions a violation of the Royalty of Christ, etc. You seem to take this as our own sense, and that of all the Ceremonies, of which we there made no mention; You refer us to Hooker, since whose writings, Aims in his fresh suit, and Bradshaw, and Parker, and many others have written that against the Ceremonies, that never was answered, that we know of, but deserve your Consideration.   

[Before we give particular Answer to these several Reasons, it 
S. 3. R. 1.  will not be unnecessary to lay down some certain general premises, or rules, which will be useful in our whole discourse. 1. That God hath not given a power only, but a command also of imposing whatsoever should be truly decent, and becoming his public Service, 1 Cor. 14. After St, Paul had ordered some particular Rules for Praying, Praising, Prophesying, etc. He concludes with this general Canon, Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a fit Scheme, Habit, or Fashion, decently, and that there may be uniformity in those decent performances, let there be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rule or Canon for that purpose.]   

Repl. As to your first rule we answer. 1. It is one thing to impose in general, that all be done decently and in order. This God himself hath imposed by his Apostle: And it's another thing to impose in particular, that this or that be used, as decent and orderly. Concerning this we add, it is in the Text said, Let it be done, but not let it be imposed, yet from other Scriptures we doubt not but Circumstances of mere decency & order, as determined time, place, utensils, etc. which are common to things civil, and sacred, though not the Symbolical Ceremonies. which afterwards we confute) may be imposed with the necessary cautions and limitations afterward laid down. But 1. that if any Usurpers will pretend a power from Christ, to impose such things on the Church, though the things be lawful, we must take heed how we acknowledge an usurped power by formal obedience. 2. A just power may impose them but to just ends, as the preservation and success of the modified Worship, or Ordinances. And if they really conduce not to those ends, they sin in imposing them. 3. Yet the Subjects are bound to obey a true Authority in such impositions, where the matter belongs to the Cognizance, and Office of the Ruler, and where the mistake is not so great, as to bring greater mischiefs to the Church, than the suspending of our active obedience would do. 4. But if these things be determined under pretence of order and decency, to the plain destruction of the ordinances modified, and of the intended end, they cease to be means, and we must not use them. 5. Or if under the names of things decent, and of order, men will meddle with things that belong not to their Office, as to institute a new Worship for God, new Sacraments, or any thing forbidden in the general Prohibition of adding or diminishing, this is a Usurpation, and not an act of Authority, and we are bound in obedience to God to disobey them. 6. Where Governors may command at set times, and by proportionable penalties enforce, if they command when it will destroy the end, or enforce by such penalties, as destroy or cross it, they greatly sin, by such commands. Thus we have more distinctly given you our sense, about the matter of your first rule.   

[Not Inferiors but Superiors must judge what is convenient and 
§. 4. Rul. 2.  decent; They who must order that all be done decently, must of necessity, first judge what is convenient, and decent to be ordered.]   

Repl. Your second Rule also is too crudely delivered, and therefore we must add: 1. A Judgement is a Sentence, in order to some Execution, and Judgements are specified from the ends, to which they are such means; When the question is either, what Law shall be made, or what penalty shall be exercised? the Magistrate is the only Judge, and not the Bishop or other Subject, In the first he exercises his judicium discretionis in order to a public Act. In the second he exerciseth a public judgement: When the question is, what order pro tempore is fittest in Circumstantials for this present Congregation; the proper Presbyters or Pastors of that Congregation, are the directive Judges, by God's appointment. 3. The Magistrate is Ruler of these Pastors, as he is of Physicians, Pailosophers, and other Subjects. He may make them such general Rules, especially for restraint, to go by, as may not destroy the exercise of their own Pastoral power: As he may forbid a Physician to use some dangerous Medicine on his Subjects, and may punish him when he wilfully killeth any of them: But may not on that presence appoint him what, and how, and when, and to whom he shall administer, and so become Physician himself alone. 4. When the question is, who shall be excluded from the Communion of a particular Church? The Pastors of the Church (or Congregation) are the first proper Judges. 5. When the question is, who shall be excluded from, (or received into) the Communion of all the associated Churches, of which we are naturally capable of Communion? The associated Pastors or Bishops of these Churches in Synods are Judg●●; Beyond this there are no Judges. 6. When the question is, whether the Laws of Magistrates, or Canons of Bishops, are agreeable or not to the Word of God, and so the obedience is lawful or unlawful, the Conscience of each individual Subject is the Judge, per judicium discretionis, as to his own practice; And if men had not this judgement of discerning, but must act upon absolute implicit obedience, than first man were ruled as unreasonable, Secondly, the magistrate were made a God, or such a Leviathan as Hobbs describeth him; Thirdly, And then all sin might lawfully be committed, if commanded: But we are assured none of this your sense.   

[These Rules and Canons for decency made and urged by Superiors 
§. 5. R. l. 3. , are to be obeyed by Inferiors, till it be made as clear that now they are not bound to obey, as it is evident in general, that they ought to obey Superiors; for if the exemption from obedience be not 
Heb. 13. 17. Rom. 13.  as evident as the Command to obey, it must needs be sin not to obey.]   

Repl. To your third Rule we add; It is first considerable what the thing is, and then how it is apprehended, if it be really lawful, and well commanded, and to be obeyed, it is no ignorance, doubt or error of the Subject that can exempt him from the duty of obeying; But it may ensnare him in a certainty of sinning, whether he obey, or disobey: For as God commandeth him to obey, and also not to do that which man commandeth, when God forbiddeth it; So he obligeth the erroneous, first to lay down his errors, and so to obey. But if a thing he forbidden of God, and commanded of man, and one man erroneously think it lawful, and that he should obey, and another is in doubt between both, it is neither a duty, nor lawful for either of them here to obey For man's error changeth nor Gods Laws, nor disobligeth himself from obedience; But this man's duty is both to lay by that error, and to refuse obedience but if the question be only of the order of such a persons duty, we answer; If the thing be really lawful, and obedience a duty, than he that doubteth or erreth, should, if possible, suddenly lay by his errors or doubt, and so obey: But if that cannot be, he should first go about the fittest means, for his better information till he be resolved, and so obey. And so on the contrary, if really the thing commanded be unlawful, if he be sure of it, he must resolve against it; if he hesitate he is not therefore allowed to do a thing forbidden, because he is ignorant: For his ignorance is supposed culpable itself, but he is first to consult and use the best means, for his Instruction, till he know the truth, and in the mean time to suspend his Act. But yet because of humane frailty, between several faults, we must consider when we cannot avoid all as we would, in what order most safely to watch, and to avoid them. And so when I have done my best, and cannot discern whether a Command be just, and the thing lawful or not; If it have the face of Idolatry, Blasphemy, or some heinous Sin; that is commanded, and our disobedience have the appearance, but of an effect of involuntary ignorance, it is more excusable in us to fear the greater Sin, and so to suspend till we are better satisfied, than to do that which we suspect, to be so heinous a Sin, though in lead it prove no sin; So on the contrary, if our disobedience be like to bring Infamy, or Calamity on the Church, and our Obedience appear to be but about a very small sin, if we doubt of it, it is more excusable to obey, than to disobey, though both be faulty, supposing the thing to be indeed unlawful, and we discern it not. So that your Rule of obeying, where you are not as sure, &c, Is an unsure Rule, unless as we have fullyer cautioned it.   

[Pretence of Conscience is no exemption from obedience, for the 
§. 6. Rul. 4.  Law as long as it is a Law, certainly binds to obedience; Rom. 13. Ye must needs be subject, and this pretence of a tender gainsaying Conscience cannot abrogate the Law, since it can neither take away the Authority of the Lawmaker, nor make the matter of the Law in itself unlawful; Besides if pretence of Conscience did exempt from obedience, Laws were useless, whosoever had not list to obey might pretend tenderness of Conscience, and be thereby set at liberty, which if once granted, Anarchy and Confusion must needs follow.]   

Repl Neither pretence of Conscience, nor real Error of Conscience exempteth from the Obligation, to obey: though sometime it may so ensnare, as that obeying shall become of the two the greater sin; so also real Errors, or pretence of Conscience will justify no man for obeying when it is by God forbidden.   

[Though Charity will move to pity, and relieve those that are 
§. 7. Rul. 5.  truly perplexed or Scrupulous: yet we must not break God's Command, in Charity to them, and therefore we must not perform public Services undecently or disorderly for the ease of tender Consciences.]   

Repl. O that you would but do all that God alloweth you, yea that he hath commanded you, for these ends! how happy would you make yourselves, and these poor afflicted Churches. But as to the instance of your Rule we answer. 1. When the indecency and disorder is so small as that it will not cross the ends, so much as our disobedience would, we are here so far more conformable, and peaceable than you, as that we would even in God's worship, do some things indecent, and disorderly, rather than disobey; And so should you do rather than destroy your Brethren, or hinder that peace, and healing of the Church. For Order is for the thing ordered, and not contrarily. For example, there is much disorder lies in the Common-Prayer- Book, yet we would obey in it, as far as the ends of our calling do require. It would be undecent to come without a Band, or other handsome raiment into the Assembly: yet rather than nor worship God at all, we would obey if that were commanded us; we are as confident that Surplices, and Copes are undecent, and kneeling at the Lords Table is disorderly, as you are of the contrary: And yet if the Magistrate would be advised by us (supposing himself addicted against you) we would advise him to be more charitable to you,, than you here advise him to be to us: We would have him, if your Conscience require it, to forbear you in this undecent and disorderly way; But to speak more distinctly. 1. There are some things decent and orderly, when the opposite species is not undecent or disorderly. 2. There are some things undecent, and disorderly, in a small and tolerable degree: And some things in a degree intolerable. 1. When things decent are commanded, whose opposites would not be at all undecent, there Charity and Peace, and Edification, may command a Relaxation; or rather should at first restrain from too severe Impositions: As it is decent to wear either a Cloak or a Gown, a Cassock buttoned, or unbuttoned, with a Girdle or without, to sit, stand, or kneel in singing of a Psalm, to sit or stand in hearing the word read, or preached etc. 2. When a Circumstance is undecent or disorderly, but in a tolerable degree, to an Inconvenience, Obedience, or Charity, or Edification, may command us to do it, and make it not only lawful, but a duty pro hic, & nunc, while the preponderating Accident prevaileth. Christ's instances go at least as far as this, about the Priests in the Temple breaking the Sabbath blamelessly and Davids eating the Show bread, which was lawful for none to eat ordinarily, but the Priests: And the Disciples rubbing the ears of Corn: (I will have mercy & not sacrifice) is a Leston that he sets us to learn, when two duties come together, to prefer the greater, if we would escape sin; And sure to keep an able Preacher in the Church, or a private Christian in Communion, is a greater duty caeteris paribus than to use a Ceremony, which we conceive to be decent; It is more orderly to use the better translation of the Scripture, than the worse as the Common-Prayer-book doth; and yet we would have no man cast out, for using the worse: It is more orderly decent, and edifying, for the Minister to read all the Psalms, than for the people to read each second verse; And yet we would not cast out men from the Church or Ministry merely for that disorder, It is more orderly, and decent to be uncovered in divine worship, than covered: And yet rather than a man should take cold, we could allow him to hear a Chapter or Sermon covered: why (not much more) rather than he should be cast out. But let us come to the Application. It is no undecent disorderly worshipping of God, to worship him without our Cross, Surplice, and kneeling in the reception of the Sacrament. 1. If it were, than Christ, and his Apostles bad worship undecently and disorderly; And the Primitive Church that used not the Surplice, nor the transient Image of the Cro●e in Baptism (but in an unguent) yea the Church for many hundred years that received the Sacrament without kneeling. 2. Then if the King, Parliament, and Convocation should change these Ceremonies, it seems you would take yourselves bound to retain them; For you say you must not worship God undecently: But that they may be changed by Authority our Articles determine, and therefore Charity may well require the Magistrate to change them without any wrong to the worship of God. 3. We appeal to the common judgement of the Impartial, whether in the nature of the thing, there be any thing that tells them, that it is undecent, to pray without a Surplice in the reading place, and not undecent to pray without in th● Pulpit; And that it is undecent to baptise without crossing, and not to receive the Lords Supper without: And that it is undecent for the Receiver to take the Lords Supper without kneeling, and not for the Minister to give it him standing that prayeth in the delivery.   

[These premised we Answer to your first Reason, that those things 
§. 8. Answ. 1.  which we call Indifferent, because neither expressly commanded nor forbidden by God, have in them a real goodness, a fitness, and decency, and for that cause, are imposed, and may be so by the Rule of St. Paul, by which Rule and many others, in Scripture a power is given, to men to impose Signs, which are never the worse surely, because they 
1. Cor. 14.  signify something that is decent and comely, and so it is not doubtful whether such power be given; It would rather be doubtful, whether the Church could impose such idle Signs, if any such there be, as signify nothing.]   

Repl. To your first Answer we reply. 1. We suppose you speak of a moral goodness; And if they are such indeed, as are within their power and really good, that is of their own nature, fi●ter than their opposites, they may be imposed by just authority by equal means, though not by Usurpers, nor by penalties that will do more harm than the things will do good. 2. Signs that signify nothing, we understand not: It is one thing to be decent, and another (to signify something that is decent: what you mean by that we know not. The Cross signifieth our not being ashamed to profess the faith of Christ crucified, etc. do you call that (something that is decent) It is something necessary to salvation. 3. Signs are exceeding various: At present we use but two distinctions. 1. Some are signs, Ex primaria intentione instituentis, purposed, and primarily instituted to signify▪ (as an Esoucheon, or a sign at an Inn door in common matters: and as the Sacrament, and Cross in sacred matters) and some are signs but consequently secondarily, and not essentially as intended by the Institutor (so hills and trees may show us what a clock it is: And so every creature signifieth some good of mercy or duty, and may be an object of holy meditation: so the colour and shape of our clothes, may mind us of some good, which yet was none of the primary, or proper end of the maker or wearer,) 2. Signs are either arbitrary expressions, of a man's own mind in a matter, where he is let free, or they are covenanting signs between us and God in the Covenant of Grace, to work Grace on us as moral causes, and to engage us Sacramentally to him; such we conceive the Cross in Baptism to be. The Preface to the Common Prayer-book saith (They are apt to teach and excite, etc. Which is a moral operation of Grace: And the Canon saith It is an honourable badge, whereby the Infant is dedicated to him that died on the Cross, We are signed with it (in token that hereafter we shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ crucified, and manfully to fight, etc.) now if a thing may be commanded merely as a decent circumstance of worship, yet it is unproved that a thing, that in its nature as instituted, and in the primary intention is thus sacramentally to dedicate and engage us in Covenant to God, by signifying the grace and duty of the Covenant be lawfully commanded by man. 1. Decent Circumstances are necessary in genere; There must be some fit Time, Place, Gesture, Vesture, (as such) Utensils, etc. But that there be some such dedicating engaging signs, in our covenanting with God signifying the Grace of the Covenant, and our state and duty as Soldiers under Christ (besides God's Sacraments) this is not necessary in genere, and therefore it is not left to man to determine de specie. 2. If there be any reason for this use of the Cross, it must be such as was in the Apostles days, and concerneth the universal Church in all ages and places, and then the Apostles would have taken care of it; Thus much here in brief of signs, and more anon when you again call us to it.   

[To the second) that it is not a violation of Christ's Royalty to make such Laws for decercy, but an exercise of his power and authority, which 
§. 9 ●. 2.  he hath given to the Church: And the disobedience to such commands of Euperiours is plainly a violation of his Royalty. As it is no violation of the King's Authority, when his Magistrates command things according to his Laws; But disobedience to the command of those Injunctions of his Deputies, is violation of his Authority; Again, it can be no impeachment of Christ's Laws as insufficient, to make such Laws for decency, since our Saviour as is evident by the Precepts themselves, did not intend by them to determine, every minute and circumstance of time, place, manner of performance, and the like, but only to command in general the substance of those duties, and the right ends that should be aimed at in the performance, and then left every man in particular (whom for that purpose he made reasonable) to guide himself by rules of reason, for private Services; And appointed Governors of the Church, to determine such particularities for the public: Thus our Lord commanded Prayers, Fasting, etc. for the times and places of performance; he did not determine every of them, but left them to be guided as we have said; So that it is no impeachment of his Laws as insufficient, to make Laws for determining those particulars of decency, which himself did not, as is plain by his Precepts, intent to determine but left us Governors for that purpose, to whom he said, As my Father, sent me, even so send I you, and let all things be done decently, and in order; of whom he hath said to us, Obey those that have the over sight over you; and told us that if we will not hear his Church we must not be accounted as Christians, but Heathens and Publicans; And yet nevertheless they will not hear it, and obey it in so small a matter, as a circumstance of time, place, habit, or the like, which she thinks decent and fit, and yet will be accounted for the best Christians, and tell us that it is the very awe of God's Law, Deut. 12. 32. that keeps them from obedience to the Church in these commands, not well considering that it cannot be any adding to the Word of God, to command things for order and decency which the Word of God commands to be done so as they be not commanded as God's immediate Word, but as the Laws of men, but that it is undeniably adding to the Word of God, to say that Superiors may not command such things, which God hath no where forbidden, and taking from the Word of God, to deny that power to men, which Gods Word hath forgiven them.]   

Repl. To make Laws [to determine of undetermined circumstances necessary in genere, to be some way determined and left to Magistrates, or Ministers de specie, and to do this according to the general rules of Scripture, and in order to the main end, and not against it. and is not against the Royalty or will of Christ; But to make new dedicating covenanting Symbols, to signify the doctrine of the Covenant of Grace, and solemnly engage us unto God, and place those in the public worship, which are not meet Circumstances, but substantial institutions, not necessary in genere (that there should be any such at all, besides God's Sacraments,) we fear this is a violation of the Royalty of Christ, and a reflection on his Laws as insufficient: for first, if it belong to the power proper to Christ, than it is a violation of his Royalty for any man to exercise it; But it belongeth to the power proper to Christ: ergo, etc. The minor is proved thus, If it belong to the universal head, or Ruler of the Church as such, than it belongs to the power proper to Christ (for we are ready to prove there is none under him, no universal head or ruler personally, or collectively and civilly one,) But &c. If in the reason of it, it should be the matter of an universal Law, if of any than it should be the work of the universal Lawgiver, if any: But etc. If in the reason of it, it be equally useful to the Church universal, as to any particular Church or age, than it should according to the reason of it, be the matter of an universal Law, if of any: But, etc. it hath the same aptitude, to engage us to a duty of universal necessity, and hath no reason proper to this age or place for it, but common to all. Moreover it is no where committed to the power or care of man, ergo it is proper to the care and power of Christ, no Text is showed that giveth man power in such things: To do all things decently and orderly, and to edification is no giving of power on that pretence to make new Covenanting dedicating signs, to do Gods work decently, etc. is not to make more such of our own heads: It is but the right modifying of the work already set us. And to do all decently, orderly, and to edification, was a duty in Moses time, when yet such things as these in question might not be added by any but God: (when we say by God, we mean by his inspired Instruments, and when we say by Christ, we mean by his inspired Instruments:) If we should make Laws that every one is publicly to taste Vinegar, and Gall, as a sign that we are not ashamed of, but resolved through all flesh displeasing difficulties to follow Christ, that died so, and thus to engage, and dedicate ourselves to him, this were to do more, then to do [all things decently, and orderly which he appointed: If milk were to be publicly sucked or drunk, by all in profession, that we will feed on the sincere milk of his word, and so dedicate us to him by Covenant, or if we were to put on an Helmet, & other Armour in token that we will be his Soldiers to the death, and manfully fight under, etc. These engagements by such public signs, are Sacraments in the sense, as the word was used of old, when it signified a Soldiers solemn lysting or Covenanting with his Commander. Thus by distinguishing decent and orderly modes, and Circumstances necessary in genere, from new ordinances, even solemn dedicating, covenanting or such like mystical signs, we have showed you what we grant, and where you fail, and what is indeed a wrong to Christ, and an accusation of his Laws and what not: and how unjust your following accusation of us is: (who never yet told you, we would be accounted the best Christians, but to desire to please Christ as near as we can, is not blame worthy.) Abundance of things of lesser moment than these are commanded by God in the Law, to which he added that sanction Deut 12. 32. What ever things I command thee, etc. And we conceive that the words [as my Father sent me so etc.] had some what proper to the extraordinary mission: and if he hear not the Church etc. is neither spoken of a Church universal, nor of Magistrates making Laws for such Ceremonies, or signs. But if he hear not the Church, with which he was in Communion, and which admonisheth him for his sin, let the Church reject him from their Communion.   

[The command for decent Ceremonies may still continue in the 
§. 10. A. 3.  Church, notwithstanding the 12. of Deut. and so it may too for all the exceptions taken against them, by sundry learned, pious, and Orthodox persons who have judged them, they say, unwarrantable. And if Laws may be abrogated assoon as those that list not to obey will except against them, the world must run into confusion. But those that except are weak Brethren, whom by Christ's Precept and example we must not offend. If by weak we understand ignorant, they would take it ill to be so accounted, and it is their own fault if they be, there having been much written, as may satisfy any that have a mind to be satisfied: And as King James of blessed memory said at Hampton-Court. If after so many years preaching of the Gospel, there be any yet unsatisfied, I doubt it proceeds rather out of stubborness of opinion than out of tenderness of Conscience, If by tenderness of Conscience they mean, a fearfulness to sin, this would make them most easy to be satisfied, because most fearful to disobey superiors. But suppose there be any so scrupulous as not satisfied with what hath been written, the Church may still without sin urge her command for these decent Ceremonies, and not be guilty of offending her weak brother, for since the scandal is taken by him, not given by her, it is he that by vain scrupulosity offends himself, and lays the stumbling-block in his own way.]   

Repl. But the command for man's Institution of a new worship of God, or of Rites Sacramental, or so like to Sacraments as the Cross is, or for the unnecessary Imposition of unnecessary things, which should be left to every prudent Minister's discretion, and this upon pain of being cast out of the Church or Ministry, and the Law for subscribing that all these are lawful, and for swearing obedience to the Bishops, all these Laws are not to be found in Scripture. If you should but command your Servant to do what you bid him decently and orderly, you would think he mistook you, if upon that pretence he would do any other work, which he could but say tended to the decency of yours. And we would gladly hear what you think yourselves is forbidden in Deut. 12. 32. If not such humane Ordinances? And why you forbear giving the truer sense of the Text. It is a sad case with the poor Church, when God's wisdom, that made a few and necessary things the matter of his Church's concord, is no more valued; But we will be wiser, and when the experience of the Church that hath been torn into pieces 1400. years, by men's Inventions, and needless usages, and Impositions, is yet of no more force with us that come after them, but what ever can be said or done, or seen, we will still make Laws, that all men shall be tantum non, unchristened and damned, (that is cast out of the Ministry or Church communion) that will not wear this or that, or bow thus or thus, or look this way or that way, or say this word or that word; and when we have laid such a needless snare, we will uncharitably cry out the world will be brought into cofusion, because men that list not to obey, would have the Laws abrogated. Where hath Christ set you to make such Laws? Is it not work enough for us & you to obey the Laws that he hath made? Why made he none for postures, and vestures, & words & teaching signs of this nature, if he would have had them: If he had not told us that there is one Lawgiver, one Lord, and that his word is able to make us wise unto Salvation, and that he would lay no greater burden on us, than necessary things, and would not have us despise, or judge each other on such occasions: If he had but told us, that he left any Officers after his inspired Apostles, for the making of Ceremonies, or new Laws of worship, or teaching engaging signs for the Church, we would as gladly understand and obey his will in these things as you, what hurt is it to us, to use a Cross, or other Ceremony, if it were not for fear of disobeying God? Enforce God's Laws upon us zealously, if you will, and see if we will disobey. But that the world shall run into confusion, rather than we shall have leave to serve God as Peter and Paul did, without Crossing, Surplices, and Kneeling at the Sacrament, and then that we shall be reproached as the cause of all by our disobedience, God hath told the world by his word, and will tell them by his Judgements that this is not his way to Unity and Peace. As to the Argument from your brethren's weakness we say first, It is not your strength to slight it or them: Nor is it their weakness that they are willing to be esteemed weak. The Apostle called those weak that placed a necessity in indifferent things, Rom. 14, And not those that understood their indifferency; But the truth is the nature of things indifferent, is not well understood by all on either side, some may think evil of some things that deserve it not, and in this they are weak, though in other matters they may be strong. And for the rest we speak according to the worst that you yourselves can charitably suppose, you can say no more of them, but that they are weaker, that is, in this know less than you, though perhaps we may take them to be stronger, that is, to be more in the right, yet are we nor so confident as to censure you, or others; but speak of things difficult, and doubtful as they are. But how prove you it, we would take it ill, to be ourselves, or have those we speak of accounted ignorant, in such things as these use us no worse than the ignorant should be used: and till you would turn a man out of the Ministry, or Church for being ignorant of the nature of a Ceremony, (which never was in his Creed, the Decalogue or Scripture) dealt not so by us, that would be wiser if we knew how. That all our ignorance is our own fault we deny not, but it is an express of confidence and uncharitableness to tell us, that there is so very much written as may satisfy any man that hath a mind to be satisfied, and when we profess in his sight that knoweth the hearts, that we have a mind to be satisfied, and would know the truth at what rate soever if we knew how, what would you have us do that we do not, to be satisfied? Do we not read as much for Ceremonies, as the dissenters use to do against them? Many Books against them are yet unanswered, and we never shunned any public, or private conference with any of you, and such reasonings as these are not like to convince us. If you will be the judges of your brethren's hearts, and say it is not tenderness of Conscience, but stubbornness, we shall refer that to the day when your hearts, and ours, shall be opened, Must none be tender Conscienced that dare not venture to obey you in such things? When you may with undoubted safety forbear the imposing of your Ceremonies, and so forbear the casting out of your brethren, if you will not, who shows less tenderness of Conscience? That the scandal is taken and not given, is still the thing in question, as to many things: and if it were not just occasion of oftence, you ought not to lay that which another's weakness will turn into a stumbling block unnecessarily before them; if the Apostles Argument be good Rom. 14. the Church may not urge unlawful things, nor things merely lawful upon such penalties as will exclude things necessary. If an idle word be to be accounted for, an idle Law is not laudable, much less when all men must be excluded the Ministry, or Communion that scruple it: when yet a man may be a profane swearer, for 12 pence an oath, and may swear an hundred times before he pays that 12 pence. A Papist shall pay 12 pence for not coming to Church, and a Protestant be thrust out of your Communion, for not kneeling at the Sacrament, and a Minister suspended, imprisoned, undone for not crossing a Child or wearing a Surplice: May Magistrates, or the Church thus urge their commands? Can any thing be spoken plainer, than the Scripture speaks against this course? And would you make the world believe that the brethren that do not all that you bid them are so unreasonably and obstinately scrupulons, as to have no matter of offence, but what they lay before themselves? when they have the practice of the Apostles, and the custom of the Primitive Church, for many hundred years against you, and this called by them an Apostolical tradition, and decreed by the most uncharitable Councils that ever were. If you had but one of these (the decree of a General Council, or practise of all the purest Churches alone) for one of your Ceremonies, you would think him uncharitable, that so reproached you for pretending Conscience.   

Sect. 11. The case of St. Paul not eating of flesh, if it offended his Brother, is nothing to the purpose, who there speaks of things not commanded either by God, or by his Church, neither having in them any thing of decency, or fignificancy to serve in the Church, St. Paul would deny himself his own liberty, rather than offend his Brother, but if any man breaks a just Law or Custom of the Church, he brands her for a lover of Schism, and Sedition, 1 Cor. 11. 16.   

Reply. But because at our last meeting it was said with so much confidence by one, that the case in Rome, 14. and 15. was nothing to ours, we shall here say the more to what you say, that St. Paul's not eating flesh is nothing to the purpose: your reasons are, first, because he speaks of nothing commanded by God or his Church. Secondly, not of any thing of decency or significancy to serve in the Church. To the first, we have oft told you, that which is undeniable; First, that Paul was a Governor of that Church himself, that had no superior to control him. If you say that he then wrote not as a Governor; we answer, Yes: For he wrote as an Apostle, and wrote the Epistle that was to be a standing Law or Canon to them: If this be not an act of his Office, and Authority, there was none such; And than you must say the like of all the rest of the Epistles. 2ly: Moreover, as Paul the Apostle excludeth all such impositions; so he wrote to all the resident Pastors that were at Rome, for he wrote to the whole Church: and therefore these commands extend to the Governors, that they make not such things the matter of Contempt or Censuces, or any uncharitable Course, but bear with one another in them. Will you call men obstinate self-offenders, that differ from you, when you have no better answers then these, to the plain decisions of the Holy Ghost? What we speak of Rom. 14. 15. we speak also of 1 Cor. 8. And 3ly. It is to the Rulers of the Church, that we are speaking, and it is they that answer us: and shall the Rulers say [If it were not a thing commanded we might bear with you] when it is themselves that command them ecclesiastically; and we entreat them but to forbear that, and to concur with us in petitioning the King, to forbear commanding them coercively, who no doubt will easily for bear it, if they do their part. 4ly. Yea, à fortiori, it layeth a heavier charge on such Governors, then others: If it be so heinous a sin as Paul maketh it, to censure or despise one another, for meat, and days, and such like things; how much more to excommunicate, silence, and undo one another, & deprive thousands of souls of the preaching of the Gospel that consented not to their Pastors' nonconformity? 5ly. Paul letteth you know, that these things are not the Centre, or matter of our necessary concord, but of mutual forbearance, & therefore condemneth all that will make them necessary to our united Ministry, or Communion. And the difference is wholly to the advantage of our cause: For those that Paul spoke to, were not come so high as to go about to force others to do as they did: but only to despise them for not doing it. 2. And therefore to your second Reason we answer. 1. If the things had been different, yet so was Paul's injunction different from our Request; For Paul goeth so high as to command them to deny their own liberty in not eating lawful meats themselves, lest they offend and hurt their brethren: whereas we are now desiring you, that you would not force others to do that which they take to be a sin, and that with penalties that fall heavier on the Church then on them. They had on both sides fairer pretences than you have: The Cases before us to be compared, are four; The Case of the Refusers of meats, and observers of days then; The Case of the users of those meats and non-observers of those days; The Case of our Imposers; And the Case of non-Conformists. The pretence of their Refusers of meats had in 1 Cor. 8. was that being offered to Idols; they thought it made them partakers of the Idolatry, & so they sinned through weakness in being offended at others, and censuring them that used their liberty: And had they not here a fairer pretence, for their offence and censures, than you for your impositions? you cannot show half so great an appearance of good in the things commanded, as they could do of evil in the things for which they were offended. And the offended censurer in Rom. 14. had this pretence, that the thing was forbidden in Gods own Law, even the meats, which he refused; and the days commanded which he observed: and he knew not that the Law in these matters of Order & Ceremony was abrogated (which Peter was ignorant of, when he refused to eat things common and unclean.) But you have no pretence of Gods own command, for the matter of your impositions, as these men had for the matter of their offence and censure, so that here you are in the worser-side. And for the other party that in 1 Cor. 8. abused their liberty, and Rom. 14. despised their brethren, they had a double pretence: one was that it was their liberty, and if every scrupulous party should drive them from their lawful meat and drink, they knew not whither they might drive them: another was, that the Law was abrogated by Christ; and therefore if they complied in practice with the scrupulous, or did not show their difference, they might seem to be guilty of the restoring of the Law, and complying with the Jews, and the Heretics, that both than were enemies to the Church, and agreed in this: Had not these men now a far fairer pretence for eating 1 Cor. 8. and for the dissent showed Rom. 14. than you ever yet produced for forcing others from Ministry and Church into sin and Hell, if they will not obey you against their consciences, and all for that which you never pretended to show a command of God for, and others show you, as they think, Scripture and Councils, and customs against. To tell us then that Paul spoke of things [not decent, and sign ficant] is [pardon our plainess] to say much less than nothing: For it was not against imposing that Paul spoke, but using, and not using censuring, and despising; And their Arguments were (suitable to their cause) of another kind of moment, than decency, or indecency, significancy or insignificancy, even from supposed Idolatry, rejecting God's Law, and complying with the Jews and Heretics, in restoring the Law, and casting away the liberties purchased by Christ even in their private eating, & drinking. To be no more tedious now, we humbly offer in any way convenient to try out with that Reverend brother tha● so confidently asserted the disparity of the Cases, and to prove that these Scriptures, most plainly condemn your impositions now in question, though we should have thought that one impartial reading of them might end the controversy, and save the Church and you from the sad effects. As to that 1 Cor. 11. 16. We answer, first, it is uncertain whether the word Custom refer to the matter of Hair, or to Contention: so many Expositors judge (q. d. The Churches of God are not contentious) 2d. Here is no institution (muchless by fallible men) of new Covenanting, dedicating, or teaching Symbols or Ceremony, nor is here any unnecessary thing enjoined: but that which nature, and the custom of the country, had made so decent as that the opposite would have been abusively undecent: This is not your case. A Cross or Surplice, is not decent by nature, or common reputation, but by institution (that is not all: for if it be not instituted because decent, it will not be decent because instituted); nor are these sodecent, as the opposite to be indecent. The Apostles worshipped God as decently without them, as you do with them; the Minister prayeth in the Pulpit as decently without the Surplice, as in the reading place with it. 3d. Paul doth but exhort them to this undoubted comeliness, (as you may well do, if men will do any thing which nature or common reputation makes to be slovenly, unmannerly or indecent, as being covered in prayer or singing Psalms, or any such like, about which we will never differ with you,) but even here he talks not of force, or such penalties as tend to the greater hurt of the Church, and the ruin of the person.   

Sect. 12. A. 4. That these Ceremonies have occasioned many divisions, is no more fault of theirs, than it was of the Gospel that the preaching of it occasioned strife, betwixt father and son, etc. The true cause of those divisions is the cause of ours, which S. Jam. tells us is Last, and inordinate desires of honours or wealth, or licentiousness, or the like; were these Ceremonies laid aside, there would be the same divisions, if some, who think Moses and Aaron took too much upon them, may be suffered to deceive the people, and to raise in them vain fears and jealousies of their Governors: but if all men would as they ought, study peace and quietness, they would find other and better fruits of these Laws of Rites and Ceremonies; as edification, decency, order and beauty in the service and worship of God.   

Reply. Whether the Ceremonies be as innocent, as to divisions, as the Gospel, (a strange assertion) will better appear when what we have said, and what is more fully said by Dr. Ames, Bradshaw, and others, is well answered. If the true cause of our divisions, be as you say (lust and inordinate desires of honours or wealth, or licentiousness) than the party that is most lustful, ambitious, covetous, and licentious, are likest to be most the cause. And for lust, and licentiousness, we should take it for a great attainment of our ends, if you will be entreated to turn the edge of your severity against the lustful, and licentious: O that you would keep them out of the Pulpits, and out of the communion of the Church, till they reform! And for ourselves, we shall take your admonitions, or severities, thankfully, when ever we are convicted by you of any such sins: We are loath to enter upon such comparison, between the Ministers ejected (for the most part), and those that are in their Rooms, as tends to show by this Rule who are likest to be the dividers. And for inordinate desire of honours and wealth, between your Lordships and us; we are contented that this Cause be decided by all England, even by our enemies at the first hearing, without any further vindication of ourselves; and so let it be judged who are the dividers: only we must say, that your intimation of this Charge on us that seek not for Bishoprics, Deaneries, Archdeaconries, or any of your preferments; that desire not, nor could accept pluralities of Benefices, with cure of souls; that never sought for more than food and raiment with the Liberty of our Ministry, even one place with a tolerable maintenance, whose provoking cause hath been our constant opposition, to the Honours, Wealth, Lordships, and pluralities of the Clergy; yea who would be glad, on the behalf of the poor Congregations, if many of our brethren might have leave to preach to their Flocks for nothing; we say, your intimation maketh us lift up our hearts, and hands to heaven, and think, Oh what is man! What may not by some History be told the world! Oh how desirable is the blessed day of the righteous universal judgement of the Lord! how small a matter till then, should it be to us to be judged of man? we hope upon pretence of not suffering us to deceive the people, you will not deny us liberty to preach the necessary saving truths of the Gospel, considering how terrible a Symptom, and Prognostic, this was in the Jews, 1 Thes. 2 15, 16. Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own Prophets, and persecuted the Apostles, and God they pleased not, and were contrary to all men, forbidding to preach to the Gentiles, that they might be saved, to fill up their sins always: for wrath was come upon them to the utmost. We can as easily bear what ever you can inflict upon us, as the hinderers of the Gospel, and silencers of faithful Ministers, and troublers of the Churches, can bear what God will inflict on them. And so the will of the Lord be done.   

Sect. 13. Cer. 3. There hath been so much said not only of the lawfulness, but also of the conveniencies of those Ceremonies mentioned, that nothing can be added: This in brief may here suffice for the Surplice, that reason and experience teaches, that decent ornaments, and habits, preserve reverence and awe; held therefore necessary to the Solemnity of Royal Acts, and Acts of justice: and why not as well to the Solemnity of Religious Worship? And in particular no habit more suitable than white linen which resembles purity, and beauty, wherein Angels have appeared, Rev. 15. Fit for those whom the Scripture calls Angels; and this habit was ancient; Chryso. Ho. 60. ad pop. Antioch.   

Repl. First, if nothing can be added, than we doubt the unanswered writings extant against these impositions, will never be well answered. 2ly. We are desirous, that no indecent Vestures or habits, be used in God's service. Those that Scruple the surplice do it not as it is a habit determined of, as decent; but as they think it is made a holy vestment, and so part of external worship, as Aaron's vestments were (as may be seen in the Arguments of Cotton, and nichols lately printed together.)   

Sect. 14. The Cross was always used in the Church, in immortali lavacro, Tertul. And therefore to testify our Communion with them, as we are taught to do in our Creed, as also in token that we shall not be ashamed of the Cross of Christ, it is fit to be used still, and we conceive cannot trouble the conscience of any that have a mind to be satisfied.   

Repl. That the Cross was always used in the Church in baptism is an assertion certainly untrue, and such as we never heard or read till now: Do you believe it was used in the baptism of the Eunuch, Lydia, the Jailor, Cornelius, the 300. Acts 3. or in those times? And when it did come up, it was with Chrism, and not ever any transient Image, and therefore you so far differ from the users. 2ly. The condemnation of genu flection on the Lords days in adoration, was at least as ancient and universal, and commanded by Councils when the Cross was not, and yet you can dispense with that, and many such usages. And if you will yourselves fall in with custom, yet every ancient common custom, was never intended to be a matter of necessity to union or toleration of our brethren: use no other force about the Cross, than the Church then did. 3ly. Your saying that [you conceive it cannot trouble the conscience of any that have a mind to be satisfied] doth but express your uncharitable censoriousness, while your brethren have studied and prayed and conferred for satisfaction, (its like as much as you,) and profess their earnest desire of it, and their readiness to hear or read any thing that you have to say in order to their satisfaction.   

Sect. 15. The posture of kneeling best suits at the Communion, as the most convenient, and so most decent for us, when we are to receive, as it were from God's hand, the greatest of Seals of the Kingdom of heaven: he that thinks he may do this sitting, let him remember the Prophet Mal. Offer this to thy Prince to receive his Seal, from his own hand sitting, see if he will accept of it. When the Church did stand at her prayers, the manner of receiving was more Adorantiun. S. Aug. Psal. 98. Cyril. Catech. Mystag. 5. Rahter more than at prayers, since standing at Prayer hath been generally left, and kneeling used instead of that, (as the Church may vary in such indifferent things); now to stand at Communion, when we keel at Prayers were not decent, much less to sit, which was never the use of the best times.   

Reply. To all this about Kneeling we say first, we have considered the Text in Mal. and what you say, and yet first, we find that our Betters even Christ's Apostles, and the universal Church for many hundred years thought not kneeling more decent, nor did the Church in the first Age think sitting unmeet in that service to the King of the Church; and we hope you reprehend them not. 2ly. You require not the Adult that are baptised, to receive that Seal or Sacrament kneeling. 3ly. When kneeling at Prayers was in use, in the Apostles times, yet kneeling in the reception of the Sacrament was not. 4ly. Why can you so lightly put off both the practice, and Canons of the Church, in this more than in other such things? However you cannot here deny de facto, but that kneeling on the Lords days in the receiving of the Sacrament was for many hundred years of the purer times of the Church dis-used, and condemned; And why do you not tell us what other general Council repealed this, that we may see whether it be such as we are any way bound by? When you say [the Church may vary in such indifferent things.] First, if kneeling or standing at prayer be an indifferent thing, then so are they at this Sacrament. 2ly. Then you follow the changes, and we the old pattern. 3ly. Then the Canons of general Councils, and Customs pretended to be from Apostolical tradition may be changed. 4ly. What is it that you call the Church, that changeth, or may change these? A Council or a popular custom? Bring us not under a foreign power. 5ly. The thing then being so indifferent and changeable, you may change it if you please for ends that are not indifferent. 6ly. And if now the Ministers may pray standing, why may not the people receive standing. 7ly. When you say that to sit was never the use of the best times] you deny the Apostles and primitive times to be the best: as to the extent of the Church they were not the best, but as to purity of administrations they were.   

Sect. 16. That there were ancient Liturgies in the Church is evident, S. Chrysostom, S. Basil, and others, and the Greeks tells us of S. James', much older than they; and though we find not in all ages whole Liturgies, yet it is certain that there were such in the oldest times, by those parts which are extant, as Sursum Corda, etc. Gloria Patri, etc. Benedicite, Hymnus, Cherubinus, etc. Verè dignum & justum, etc. Dominus vobiscum. Et cum spiritu tuo, with divers others. Though those that are extant may be interpolated, yet such things as are found in them all consistent to Catholic and primitive doctrine, may well be presumed to have been from the first, especially since we find no original of these Liturgies from general Councils.   

Reply. We know there wanteth not a Lindanus, a Coccius, to tell the world of S. Peter's Liturgy, which yet prayeth that by the intercession of S. Peter, and Paul, we may be defended, &c, and mentioneth Linus, Cletus, Clemens, Cornelius, Cyprian, Lucia, Barbara, and abundance such: shall we therefore conclude, that there were Liturgies from the first? and that what is here consentient to Antiquity, was in it? There wants not a Marg. de la Bigne, à Greg. de Valent. à Coccius to commend to us the Liturgy of Mark, that prayeth, Protege Civitatem istam proper Martyrem tuum & Evangelistam Marcum, etc. And tells us, that the King where the Author lived was an Orthodox Christian, and prayeth for the Pope, Subdeacons', Lelors, Cantors, Monks, etc. Must we therefore believe that all that's Orthodox in it is ancient? So there wants not a Bign. Bellarm. etc. to tell us of S. James his Liturgy, that mentions the Confessors, the Deiparam, the Anchorets, etc. which made Bellarm. himself say [de Liturgia Jacobi sic sentio, Eam aut non esse ejus, aut multa à posterioribus eidem addita sunt]. And must we prove the Antiquity of Liturgies by this, or try ours by it? There wants not a Sainctetius, a Bellarm. a Valentia, a Peresius to predicate the Liturgy of S. Basil, as bearing witness to transubstantiation, for the sacrifice of the Mass for praying to Saints, etc. When yet the exceeding disagreement of Copies, the difference of some forms from Basils' ordinary forms, the prayers for the most pious and faithful Emperors, show it unlikely to have been Basils: many predicate Chrysostom's Mass or Liturgy, as making for praying to the dead, and for them, the propitiatory Sacrifice of the Mass, etc. when in one edition, Chrysostom is prayed to in it, saith Cook: in another. Nicolaus, and Alexius that lived 1080 is mentioned: in another, doctrines are contained (as the Contaminata Maria) etc. clean contrary to Chrysostoms' doctrine: must we now conclude that all is ancient, that is Orthodox, when one Copy is scarce like another? or can we try our Liturgies by such as this? The shreds cited by you prove a Liturgy indeed, such as we have used while the Common Prayer-book was not used, where the Psalms, the words of Baptism, and the words of Consecration, commemoration and delivery of the Lords Supper, and many other, were used in a constant form, when other parts were used as the Minister found most meet so Sursum Corda was but a warning before, or in the midst of devotion, such as our [Let us pray] and will no more prove that the substance of prayer was not left to the Minister's present or prepared Conceptions, than Ite missa est, will prove it. The Gloria patri Bellarm. himself saith, according to the common opinion was form in the council of Nice, which was in the 4th Century. And even then such a particular testimony against the Arrians might well stand with a body of unimposed prayers, and rather shows that in other things they were left at liberty; If the Benedicite, the Hymns, or other passages here mentioned, will prove such a Liturgy as pleaseth you, we pray you bear with our way of worship, which hath more of Hymns and other forms then these come to; That these Liturgies had no original from general Councils adds nothing with us to their Authority, but showeth that they had an arbitrary original: and all set together, shows that then they had many Liturgies in one Prince's Dominion, and those alterable, and not forced, and that they took not one Liturgy to be any necessary means to the Church's unity or peace, but bore with those that used various at discretion. We well remember that Tertull, tells the Heathens that Christians showed by their conceived Hymns, that they were sober at their religious feasts, it being their custom [ut quisque de scripturis sanctis, vel de proprio ingenio potest, provocetur in medium Deo canere] Apol. cap. 39 Note here 1. that though there be more need of forms for singing then for praying. yet even in this, the Christians in public had then a liberty of doing it the proprio ingenio, and by their own wit or parts. 2. That those that did not the proprio ingenio, did it the scriptures sanctis, and that there is no mention of any other Liturgy, from which they fetch so much as their Hymns. And the same Tertul. Apol. cap. 30. describing the Christians public prayers saith [sine monitore, quia de pectore, oramus] [we pray without a Monitor or promptor, because we do it from the heart, or from our own breast,] And before him Just. Mart. Ap. 2. p. 77. saith, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. But if all these words seem not plain enough to some, it is no wonder when they rest not in the greater plainness of the holy Scriptures, where prayer is so frequently mentioned, as much of the employment of believers; and so many directions, encouragements and exhortations given about it: and yet no Liturgy or stinted forms, except the Lord's prayer, is prescribed to them, or once made mention of, no man directed here to use such, no man exhorted to get him a Prayer-book, or to read or learn it, or to beware that he add or diminish not: whereas the holy Scriptures that were then given to the Church, men are exhorted to read, and study, and meditate in, and discourse of, and make it their continual delight: and it's a wonder that David, that mentions it so oft in the 119. Psalms, doth never mention the Liturgy, or Common-Prayer-Book, if they had any: And that Solomon, when he dedicated the house of Prayer without a Prayer-book, would only beg of God, to hear [what Prayers, or what Supplication soever, shall be made of any man, or of all the people of Israel, when every one shall know his own sore, and his own grief, and shall spread forth his hands in that house] 2 Chron. 6. 29. and that he giveth no hint of any Liturgy or form, so much as in those common Calamities; and talks of no other book than the knowledge of their own sores, and their own griefs: And in the Case of Psalms, or singing unto God; where it is certain, that they had a Liturgy or form, (as we have,) they are carefully collected, preserved, and delivered to us, as a choice part of the holy Scripture. And would it not have been so with the prayers? or would they have been altogether unmentioned, if they also had been there prescribed to, and used by, the Church, as the Psalms were? Would Christ and his Apostles, even where they were purposely giving rules for prayer, and correcting its abuse, as Matth. 6. 1 Cor. 14. etc. have never mentioned any forms but the Lord's Prayer, if they had appointed such, or desired such to be imposed, and observed? These things are incredible to us when we most impartially consider them. For our own parts, as we think it uncharitable to forbid the use of Spectacles to them that have weak eyes, or of Crutches to them that have weak Limbs; and as uncharitable to undo all that will not use them, whether they need them or not: so we can think no better of them, that will suffer none to use such forms, that need them; or that will suffer none to pray, but in the words of other men's prescribing, though they are at least, as able as the prescribers. And to conclude, we humbly crave, that ancient customs may not be used against themselves, and us; and that you will not innovate, under the shelter of the name of Antiquity. Let those things be freely used among us, that were so used in the purest primitive times. Let unity and peace be laid on nothing, on which they laid them not; let diversity of Liturgies, and Ceremonies be allowed, where they allowed it. May we but have love and peace, on the Terms as the ancient Church enjoyed them, we shall then hope we may yet escape the hands of uncharitable destroying Zeal: we therefore humbly recommend to your observation the concurrent Testimony of the best Histories of the Church concerning the diversity of Liturgies, Ceremonies, and modal observances in the several Churches under one and the same civil Government: and how they then took it to be their duty to forbear each other in these matters, and how they made them not the test of their Communion, or centre of their peace. Concerning the observation of Easter itself, when other Holy days, and Ceremonies were urged, were less stood upon, you have the judgement of Irenaeus, and the French Bishops, in whose name he wrote in Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 5. c: 23. Where they reprehend Victor for breaking peace with the Churches, that differed about the day, and the antecedent time of fasting, and tell him that the variety began, before their times, when yet they nevertheless retained peace, and yet retain it; and the discord in their fasting declared, or commended the concord of their faith, that no man was rejected from Communion by Victor's, predecessors on that account, but they gave them the Sacrament, and maintained peace with them, and particularly Polycarp, and Anicetus, held Communion in the Eucharist, notwithstanding this difference. Basil Epist. 63 doth plead his cause with the Presbyters, and whole Clergy of Neocaesarea, that were offended at his new Psalmody, and his new order of monastics: but he only defendeth himself, and urgeth none of them to imitate him, but telleth him also of the novelty of their own Liturgy, that it was not known in the time of their own late renowned Bp. Greg Thaumaturgus, telling them that they had kept nothing unchanged to that day of all that he was used to, (so great alterations in 40. years were made in the same Congregation) as he professeth to pardon all such things, so be it the principal things be kept safe. Socrat. Hist. Eccl. l. 5●. c. 21. about the Easter difference saith, that neither the Apostles, nor the Gospels, do impose a yoke of bondage on those that betake themselves to the doctrine of Christ, but left the Feast of Easter, and other Festivals, to the observation of the free and equal judgement of them that had received the benefits. And therefore because men use to keep some Festivals, for the relaxing themselves from labours, several persons in several places, do celebrate, of custom, the memorial of Christ's passion arbitrarily, or at their own choice. For neither our Saviour, nor the Apostles commanded the keeping of them by any Law, nor threaten any mulct, or penalty, etc. It was the purpose of the Apostles not to make Laws for the keeping of Festivals, but to be Authors to us of the reason of right living, and of piety. And having showed that it came up by private custom, and not by Law, and having cited Irenaeus, as before he addeth, [that those that agree in the same faith, do differ in point of Rites and Ceremonies] and instancing in divers, he concludeth that because no man can show in the monuments of writings, any Command concerning this, it is plain, that the Apostles herein permitted free power to every one's mind and will; that every man might do that which was good, without being induced by fear, or by necessity.] And having spoken of the diversity of customs, about the Assemblies, Marriage, Baptism, etc. He tells us that even among the Novatians themselves, there is a diversity in their manner of their praying [and that among all the forms of Religions and parties, you can no where find two, that consent among themselves in the manner of their praying.] And repeating the decree of the Holy Ghost, Acts 15. [To impose no other burden but things necessary] he reprehendeth them that, neglecting this, will take Fornication as a thing indifferent; but strive about Festivals, as if it were a matter of life, overturning God's Laws, and making Laws to themselves.] etc. And Sozomen Hist. Eccles. l. 7. c. 18. and 19 speaketh to the same purpose, and tells us that the Novatians themselves determined in a Synod at Sangar in Bythinia, that the difference about Easter being not a sufficient Cause for breach of Communion, all should abide in the same concord, and in the same Assembly, and every one should celebrate this Feast as pleased himself: and this Canon they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and c. 19 He saith of Victor, and Polycarp, that [they deservedly judged it frivolous, or absurd, that those should be separated on the account of a custom, that consented in the principal heads of Religion: For you cannot find the same traditions in all things alike, in all Churches, though they agree among themselves] and instancing in some Countries, where there is but one Bishop in many Cities, and in other Bishops are ordained in the Villages.] After many other instances, he adds that they use not the same prayers, sing or readings, nor observe the same time of using them.] And what Liturgy was imposed upon Constantine the Emperor, or what Bishops or Synods, were then the makers of Liturgies, when he himself made public prayers for himself and auditory, and for his Soldiers? Euseb. de vit. Constantini, l. 4. c. 18. 20, etc. But the diversity, liberty, and change of Liturgies in the Churches under the same Prince, are things so well known, as that we may suppose any further proof of it to be needless. In the conclusion therefore, we humbly beseech you, that as Antiquity and the custom of the Churches in the first ages, is that which is most commonly, and confidently pleaded against us, that your mistake of Antiquity may not be to our Cost, or paid so dear for, as the loss of our Freedom, for the serving of God in the work of the Ministry to which we are called; we beseech you let us not be silenced or cast out of the Ministry or Church, for not using the Liturgy, Cross, Surplice, kneeling at the Sacrament, till ye have either showed the world that the practice or Canons of the Catholic Church hav● led you the way as doing it, or requiring it to be done. And make not that to necessary as to force men to it on such dreadful terms, which the ancient Churches used with diversity, and indifferency of liberty; we beseech you show the world some proof, that the ancient Churches did ever use to force, or require Ministers to subscribe to their Liturgies, as having nothing in them contrary to the word of God, or to swear obedience to their Bishops, before you impose such things on us, while yet you pretend to imitate Antiquity. And have but that moderation towards your brethren: as in suffering, or at death, or judgement, you would most appear. Remember how unpleasing the remembrance of such differences about Ceremonies was to Bp. Ridley, as towards Bp. Hooper, when they were in prison: and how the Arrians fury made the Orthodox gladly to go to the Churches of the Novatians, and meet with them and join with them in prayer, and had almost been united with them in the bond of Concord, if the Novatians, in a stiff maintaining of their old customs had not utterly refused it; But yet in other matters they embraced each other with so singular a benevolence and love, that they would willingly have died for each other] as Socrat, tells us Hist. l. 2. c. 30. And may we not all here see our duty? When Atticus was urged to deny to the Novations the Liberty of then meetings within the City, he refused it, because they had suffered for the faith, in the Arrians persecution; & changed nothing in the faith, though they separated from the Church: and was so far from violence against dissenters, as that he gave large relief to them, that differed from him in Religion, Socrates Hist. l. 7 c. 25. It was the much praised saying of Theodosius to him that asked him, Why he put none to death that wronged him. [I would I could rather make them that are dead alive] Socrates l. 7. c. 22. Much more should Christian Bps. be enemies to cruelty who know that Charity is more essential to Christianity then this, or that form of Liturgy, or Ceremonies. If you think it unsufferable that we should have differences about such things, remember that there will be no perfect Unity till there is perfect Charity, and sanctity; and that destroying one another, and consequently destroying Charity, is an unhappy way to Unity. And that Unity is to be held in things necessary, & Liberty in things unnecessary, and Charity in both: remember that it was in a far greater difference, where Constantine persuadeth the Christians to mutual forbearance by the example of the Philosophers, that suffered differences in abundance of their opinions, Euseb. de vita Constant. l. 2. c. 67. And that Valens the Arrian was made more moderate, and abated his persecution of the Orthodox by the Oration of Themistius, who bid him not wonder at the dissensions of Christians; for they were small if compared with the multitude & cloud of opinions that are among the heathen Philosophers, as being more than 300. And that God will by his diversity of opinions manifest his glory and make men the more reverence him, who is so hardly known] Socrat. l. 4. c. 27. Those that descent from you in these colerable Cases cannot change their own Opinions; But you can, if you will, forbear hurting of your brethren. Do that which you can do; rather than urge them by unsuitable means to that which they cannot do. These are not matters sufficient to justify contention, & uncharitable usage of your brethren. When many of the Macedonian faction petitioned the good Emperor Jovianus to depose those that affirmed the son to be unlike the Father, and to put their party in their places, he gave them no answer but this [I hate contention; and I love and honour them that are addicted to concord] Socrat. l. 4. c. 21. [Then, saith Euseb Hist. l 8. c. 1. did the Lord obscure the daughter of Zion, and cast down the glory of Israel, etc. When those that seemed our Pastors, rejecting the rule of godliness, were inflamed among themselves with mutual contentions, & drove on only those contentions, threatenings, emulations, mutual hatred and enmity, & the like, Tyrants prosecuted their Ambitions]. We thought it no impertinent digression here to take this occasion again to crave your exercise of the ancient Charity, and our enjoyment of the ancient Liberty, instead of forcing the anciently free Liturgy, and Ceremonies, and that by improportionable penalties; And if yet we cannot prevail with you, we shall still beg for peace of the God of peace, where we have better hopes to be heard and shall hold on in seeking it, how ill soever our endeavours may be interpreted or succeed. And as the good man wept, Socrat. l. 4. c. 18. when he saw a woman pompously adorned, because he was not so careful to please God, as she was to allure men: so we shall confess we ought to weep, that we cannot be more Charitable, & laborious in building up the Church in holiness and peace, than others are by uncharitable courses, to afflict it. And it shall be our hope that whether by their labours, or their sufferings, God will serve and honour himself, by those many faithful servants of his, whom he hath called into his work, and whose cause we plead, and that however they are used they shall not be unuseful to the ends of their vocation. As Theodoret observes Hist l. 4. c. 30. that in a Calamitous time, [the Moderator of the Universe raised up such guides as were sufficient, in so great a fluctuation, and opposed the valour of the Leaders, to the greatness of the enemy's incursion, & gave the best remedies in the hardest times of Pestilence.] so that the banished Pastors did from the uttermost parts of the earth corroborate their own, and refute the adversaries by their writings] And for ourselves, as we were truly desirous to do our parts to preserve your reputation with the flocks, in order to the success of your Government for their good, and never envied you, even that worldly honour or revenue, which yet some have thought unsuitable to the simplicity and employment of Christ's Ministers: so if you will neither suffer us quietly to serve God or conscionably to serve you, we shall be the less solicitous for that part of our task, from which you have power to discharge us. And as Basil said to Valens the Emperor that would have him pray for the life of his Son [If thou wilt receive the true faith, & restore the Churches to concord, thy son shall live, which when he refused, he said [The will of God then be done with thy Son,] so we say to you: If you will put on Charity, and promote your brethren's and the Church's peace, God will honour you, and good men will honour you, and your calling will have advantage by it. But if you will do contrary, the Will of the Lord be done with your honours. But know that them that honour him, he will honour, and those that despise him shall be lightly esteemed: and that by the course of uncharitable violence, which we deprecate, you will most deeply wound the Cause of your Pre-eminence, even more than its adversaries could have done. And if it be the will of God, that suffering at home where we have served him, must be our Lot, we doubt not but he will furnish us with strength, and patience, and we shall remember such ensamples as Ruffian recordeth, Hist. l. 2. c. 3. When a military Bishop sent his Soldiers, to assault 300 scattered Christians, there appeared a strange kind of warfare, when the assaulted offered their necks, saying only, Amice, ad quid venistr? Friend, why camest thou thither? Or if we must be removed from the land of our Nativity, as Maris told Julian, He thanked God that had deprived him of his sight, that he might not see the face of such a man, Socrat. Hist. l. 3. c. 10. So we shall take it as a little abatement of our affliction, that we see not the Sins, and Calamities of the people, whose peace and welfare we so much desire. Having taking this opportunity here to conclude this part with these Requests and Warnings; we now proceed to the second part, containing the particulars of our Exceptions, and your Answers.   

Concerning Morning and Evening Prayer.  

Sect. 1. [Rubr. 1. We think it fit that the Rubric stand as it is and all to be left to the discretion of the Ordinary.]   

Reply. We thought the end and use more considerable than custom and that the Ordinary himself should be under the rule of doing to edification.   

Sect. 2. Rub. [For the reasons given in our Answer to the 18th General, whither you refer us, we think it fit that the Rubric continue as it is.]   

Reply. We have given you reason enough against the imposition of the usual Ceremonies; and would you draw forth those absolute ones to increase the burden?   

Sect. 3. Lords Pr. [Deliver us from evil. These words, For thine is the Kingdom, etc. are not in S. Luke, nor in the ancient Copies of St. Matth. never mentioned in the ancient Comments, nor used in the Latin Church, and therefore questioned whether they be part of the Gospel: there is no reason that they should be always used.]   

Reply. We shall not be so over-credulous as to believe you, that these words are not in the ancient Copies: It is enough that we believe that some few ancient Copies have them not; but that the most (even the generality except those few) have them. The judgement of our English Translators, and almost all other Translators of Matth. and of the reverend B of Chester, among yourselves, putting the Copy that hath it in his Bible, (as that which is most received, and approved by the Church) do show on which side is the chief authority: if the few copies that want it had been thought more arthentick and credible, the Church of England and most other Churches would not have preferred the copies that have this doxology. And why will you in this contradict the later judgement of the Church, expressed in the translation allowed and imposed? The Syriack, Ethiopick, and Persian translations also have it: and if the Syriack be as ancient as you yourselves even now asserted, than the antiquity of doxology is there evident: and it is not altogether to be neglected, which by Chemnitius and others is conjectured, that Paul's words in Tim. 4. 18. were spoken as in reference to this Doxology. And as Pareus and other Protestants conclude, it is more probable the Latrines neglected, than that the Greeks inserted of their own heads this sentence. The Socinians and Arrians have as fair pretence for their exception a ainst 1 John 5, 6, 7. Masculus saith, [non cogitant vero similius esse, ut Graecorum ecclesia magis quam Latina, quod ab Evangelistis Graece scriptum est, integrum seruârit, nihilque de suo adjecerit. Quid de Graeca ecclesia dico? vidi ipse vetustissimum Evangelium secundum Matth. Codicem Chaldaeis & Elementis, & Verbis conscriptum, in quo Coronis ista perinde atque in Graecis legebatur. Nec Chaldaei solum, sed & drabs Christiani paciformiter cum Graecis orant, & Exemplar Hebraeum à docto & celebri D. Sebast. Munstero vulgatum, hanc ipsam Coronidem habet; Cum ergo consentiunt hâc in re Hebraeorum, Chaldaeorum, Arabum, & Graecorum Ecolesiae contra omnes reliquas, tantum tribuitur authoritatis, ut quod s●la diversum legit, ab Evangelitis traditum esse credatur: quod vero reliquae omnes concorditer habent & orant, pro addititio & peregrino habeatur. And that Luke hath it not, will no more prove that it was not a part of the Lords Prayer, than all other omissions of one Evangelist, will prove that such words are corruptions in the other, that have them. All set together give us the Gospel fully, and from all we must gather it.   

Sect. 4. Lords Pr●often used. [It is used but twice in the morning, and twice in the Evening Service, and twice cannot be called often, much less so often. For the Litany, Communion, Baptism, etc. they are Offices distinct from morning and evening prayer, and it is not sit that any of them should want the Lord, Prayer.]   

Reply. We may better say, we are required to use it six times every morning than but twice, for it is twice in the Common morning prayer, and once in the Litany, & once in the Communion service, & once at Baptism, (which in great Parishes is usual every day) and once to be used by the Preacher in the Pulpit. And if you call these distinct offices, that maketh not the Lords Prayer the seldomer used: sure we are, the Apostles thought it fit that many of their prayers should be without the Lords Prayer.   

Sect. 5. Glor. Patri. [This Doxology being a solemn Confession of the blessed Trinity should not be thought a burden to any Christian Liturgy, especially being so short as it is: neither is the repetition of it to be thought a vain repetition, more than His mercy endureth for ever, so often repeated Psal. 136. We cannot give God too much glory; that being the end of our Creation, and should be the end of all our Services.]   

Reply. Though we cannot give God too much glory, we may too often repeat a form of words, wherein his name and glory is mentioned: there is great difference between a Psalm of praise, and the praise in our ordinary prayers: more liberty of repetition may be taken in Psalms, and be an Ornament; and there is difference between that which is unusual (in one Psalm of 150.) and that which is our daily course of worship. When you have well proved that Christ's prohibition of battology extendeth not to this (Matth. 6.); we shall acquiesce.   

Sect. 6. P. 15. Ru. 2. [In such places where they do sing, etc.] The Rubr. directs only such singing, as is after the manner of distinct reading, and we never heard of any inconvenience thereby, and therefore conceive this Demand to be needless.]   

Reply. It tempteth men to think they should read in a singing tone: and to turn reading Scripture into Singing, hath the inconvenience of turning the edifying simplicity and plainness of God's service into such affected unnatural strains and tones, as is used by the Mimical, and Ludicious, or such as feign themselves in raptures: and the highest things (such as words and modes that signify Raptures) are most loathsome, when forced, feigned, and hypocritically affected; and therefore not fit for Congregations, that cannot be supposed to be in such Raptures; this we apply also to the sententious mode of prayers.   

Sect. 7. Benedicite. [This Hymn was used all the Church over, Conc. Tolet. Can. 13. and therefore should be continued still, as well as Te Deum, (Ruffian. Apol. cont. Hieron.) or Veni Creator, which they do not object against as Apocryphal.]   

Reply. You much discourage us in these great straits of time to give us such loose and troublesome citations; you turn us to Ruffian Apol. in gross, and tell us not which of the Councils of Tolet (among at least 13.) you mean: but we find the words in Council 4. But that provincial Spanish Council, was no meet Judge of the Affairs of the universal Church, unto the universal Church: nor is it certain by their words whether (quem) refer not to (eadem) rather than to (Hymnum): but if you so regard that Council, remember that Can. 9 it is but once a day that the Lords prayer is in joined, against them that used it on the Lord's day only; and that Can. 17. it is employed, that it was said but once on that day. The Benedicite is somewhat more cautelously to be used than humane Compositions that profess to be but humane; when the Apocryphal writings that are by the Papists to be Canonical, and used so like the Canon in our Church, we have the more cause to desire that a sufficient distinction be still made.    

In the Litany.  

Sect. 1. The alterations here desired are so nice, as if they that made them were given to change.   

Reply. We bear your Censure: but profess, that if you will desert the products of Changers, and stick to the unchangeable Rule delivered by the Holy Ghost, we shall joyfully agree with you. Let them that prove most given to change, from the unchangeable Rule and Ensamples, be taken for the hinderers of our unity and peace.   

Sect. 2. From all other deadly sin, is better, than, From all other heinous sin] upon the reason here given; because the wages of sin is death.   

Reply. There is so much mortal poison in the Popish distinction of mortal, and venial sin, (by which abundance of sins are denied to be sins at all properly, but only Analogically) that the stomach that feareth it, is not to be charged with niceness. The words here seem to be used by way of distinction, and all [deadly sin] seemeth not to be spoken of [all sin.] And if so, your reason from Rom. 6. 23. is vain, and ours firm.   

Sect. 3. From sudden death, as good as, From dying suddenly, which therefore we pray against, that we may not be unprepared.   

Reply. We added [unprepared] as expository, or hinting to show the reason why sudden death is prayed against, and so to limit our prayers to that sudden death, which we are unprepared for; there being some ways of sudden death no more to be prayed against, than death itself simply considered may. When you say [from sudden death] is as good as [from dying suddenly] we confess it is. But not so good as [from dying suddenly, and unpreparedly: we hope you intent not to make any believe, that out turning the Adjective to an Adverb was our Reformation. And yet we wondered to hear this made a common jest upon us, as from those that had seen our papers: Would you have had us said [from sudden and unprepared death?] you would then have had more matter of just exception against the words [unprepared death] than now you have against dying suddenly: A man may be well prepared to die suddenly by Martyrdom for Christ, or by War for his Prince, and many other ways.   

Sect. 4. [All that travel,] as little liable to exception as [those that travel,] and more agreeable to the phrase of Scripture, 1 Tim. 1. 2. I will that prayers be made for all men.]   

Reply. An Universal is to be understood properly, as comprehending all the Individuals, and so is not an Indefinite; And we know not that we are bound to pray for Thiefs, and Pirates, and Traitors that travel by land, or water, on such errands as Faux, or the other Powder-plotters, or the Spanish Armado in 88 or as Parry, or any that should travel on the Errand as Clement or Raviliac did to the two King Henry's of France; Are these Niceties with you?   

Sect. 5. P. 16. [The 2d. Collect, etc.] We do not find, nor do they say, what is to be amended in these Collects; therefore to say any thing particularly, were to answer to we know not what.]   

Reply. We are glad that one word in the proper Collects, hath appeared such to you as needs a Reformation, especially when you told us before that the Liturgy was never found fault with by those to whom the name of Protestant most properly belongs]; which looked upon our hopes of Reformation, almost as destructively as the Papists Doctrine of Infallibility doth, when we dealt with them. As for the Collects mentioned by us, you should not wonder that we brought not in a particular Charge against them: For first, we had a conceit that it was best for us to deal as gently & tenderly as we could with the faults of the Liturgy, and therefore we have under our Generals, hid abundance of particulars, which you may find in the Abridgement of the Lincolnshire Ministers, and in many other Books; And Secondly, we had a conceit, that you would have vouchsafed to treat with us personally in presence, according to the sense of his majesty's Commission, and then we thought to have told you particularly of such matters: but you have forced us to confess, that we find ourselves deceived.    

The Communion Service.  

Sect. 1. P. 17. Kyries. To say [Lord have mercy upon us] after every Commandment is more quick and active, than to say it once at the Close, and why Christian people should not upon their knees ask their pardor for their life forfeited for the breach of every Commandment, and pray for Grace to keep them for the time to come, they must be more than Ignorant that can cruple.   

Reply. We thank you for saying nothing against our four first requests: though we are thought more than Ignorant for our scruple, we can truly say, We are willing to learn. But your bare opinion is not enough to cure Ignorance, and more. By your reason, you may make kneeling the Gesture for hearing the Scriptures read, and hearing Sermons, and all; If you will but interweave prayers, he must be more than Ignorant that will not kneel. The universal Church of Christ was more than Ignorant for many hundred years, that not only neglected, but prohibited Genuflexion in all adoration each Lord's day: when now the 20th. of Exod. or 5th. of Deut. may not be heard or read without kneeling, save only by the Clergy.   

Sect. 2. P. 18. Homilies. Some Livings are so small, that they are not able to maintain a licenced Preacher, and in such and the like Cases this provision is necessary: nor can any reason be given, why the Minister's reading a Homily, set forth by common Authority, should not be accounted preaching of the Word, as well as his reading (or pronouncing by heart) a Homily, or Sermon of his own, or any other man's.   

Repl. When the Usurper would quickly have brought Livings to that competency, as would have maintained able Preachers, we may not question whether just Authority will do it. 2ly. When abundance of able Ministers cast out, would be glad of liberty to preach for nothing, this pretence hath no taste, or sense in it. 3ly. When we may not without the imputation of uncharitableness once imagine, that your Lordships with your Deans, and other Officers, do not value the saving of souls above money, we may conclude, that you will voluntarily allow so much out of your ample Revenues, as will supply such places or many of them; The rather because we find you charging them, as desiring inordinately the honours, and wealth of the world, that would have had all Ministers to have had 100 li. or 80. li. per annum a piece: and therefore may conclude that you will take no more, if you hate that sin, more than they do that are accused of it. But the next place of your Answer frighteth us more: to which we say, that we will not differ with you for the name, Whether reading Homilies may be called Preaching. But we take the boldness to say, That it is another manner of preaching that Christ and his Apostles sent men to perform, and which the Church hath gloried in, and been edified by, to this day, and which thousands of souls have been brought to Heaven by, and which we again desire may be enjoined, and not left so indifferent.   

Sect. 3. Sentences.  
[The Sentences tend all to exhort the people to pious liberality, whether the Object be the Minister, or the Poor, and though some of the Sentences be Apocryphal, they may be useful for that purpose.] Why Collection for the poor, should be made at another time, there is no reason given, only change desired.   

Reply.  
1. We have oft told you why the Apocrypha should be cautelously used in the Church: That Usurper that should pretend to the Crown, and have a more numerous party than the King, (that hath the undoubted right) will be looked on more suspiciously then ordinary subjects. 2. It is a sordid thing for Ministers to love money; and its sordid, unless in extraordinary necessities, to have them beg, and beg for themselves, and beg under pretence of serving God, even in times when the Clergy seems advanced. 3. We confess ourselves deceived, in thinking we should have free personal debates with you, which made us reserve many of our Reasons. Reasons are, 1. for less disturbance. 2. Because the people's affections are much more raised usually, and so fitter for returns, when they have received. 3. Because especially it is most seasonable to do the Acts of gratitude, when we have received the obliging benefits; and so say (What shall I give the Lord for all his benefits?) when we have partaked of them, and to offer ourselves first, and with ourselves, what he giveth us, unto Him, when we have received him, and his grace offered to us.  
These are the Reasons that brought us under your censure of desiring a change.   

Sect. 4. P. 19 3. Exhort.  
[The first and third Exhortations are very seasonable before the Communion, to put men in mind how they ought to be prepared, and in what danger they are, to come unprepared; that, if they be not duly qualified, they may depart, and be better prepared another time.   

Reply.  
But is it not more seasonable, that, in so great business, such warning go a considerable time before? Is there leisure of self-examination, and making restitution, and satisfaction, and going to the Minister for Counsel to quiet his conscience, etc. in order to the present Sacrament? We yet desire those things may be sooner told them.   

Sect. 5. Exc. 1.  
[We fear this may discourage many] Certainly themselves cannot desire, that men should come to the holy Communion with a troubled conscience, and therefore have no reason to blame the Church for saying, It is requisite, that men come with a quiet conscience, and prescribing means for quieting thereof: If this be to discourage men, it is fit they should be discouraged and deterred, and kept from the Communion, till they have done all that is here directed by the Church, which they may well do, considering that this Exhortation shall be read in the Church, the Sunday, or Holiday before].   

Reply.  
But we can, and do, desire that many that have a troubled conscience, and cannot otherwise quiet it, should come to the Communion for remedy and not be discouraged, or kept away.   

Sect. 6. Minister's turning.  
[The Minister's turning to the people, is not most convenient throughout the whole Ministration: when he speaks to them as in Lessons, Absolution, and Benedictions, it is convenient that he turn to them; when he speaks for them to God, it is fit that they should all turn another way, as the ancient Church ever did; the reasons of which you may see, Aug. lib. 2, de Ser. Dom. in monte.   

Reply,  
It is not yet understood by us, why the Ministers, or people, (for, which you mean by [they all] we know not) should turn another way in prayer: we think, the people should hear the prayers of the Minister; if not, Latin prayers may serve; and than you need not except against extemporate prayers, because the people cannot own them; for how can most of them own what they hear not, whatever it be? As for August. reason for looking towards the East, when we pray, (Ut admoneatur animus ad naturam excellentiorem se convertere, id est, ad Dominum; cum ipsum corpus ejus, quod est terrenum, ad corpus excellentius, id est, ad corpus celeste convertitur): We suppose you will not expect that we should be much moved by it; if we should, Why should not we worship towards any of the creatures visible, when we can pretend such Reasons for it, as minding us of superior things? and why should not we look Southward, when the Sun is in the South?  
And we fear the worshipping towards the Sun, as representing or minding us of Christ's heavenly body, is too like to the prohibited worshipping before an Image, and too like that worshipping before the Host of Heaven, in which the old Idolatry consisted, or at lest which was the Introduction of it; of which our Protestant Writers treat at large against the Papists, on the point of Image-Worship; See also V●ssius de Idololatriâ, lib. 2. cap. 23. etc.   

Sect. 7. Exc. 3.  
[It appears by the greatest evidences of Antiquity, that it was upon the 25. day of Decemb. S. Aug. in Psal. 132.]   

Reply.  
It is not Aug. alone in Psal. 132. that must tell us which way the greatest Evidences of Antiquity go: and his reasoning that John must decrease, and Christ must increase, as proved by John's being born when the days decrease, and Christ's being born when the days increase, doth not much invite us to receive his Testimony. We conceive the Ancient opinion of Jerusalem, and other Eastern Churches that were nearest to the place, is a greater Argument for the contrary, than you have here given us for what you thus affirm: We might set Epiphanius against Augustine, and all the Greek Church, till in the midst of Chrysostom's time, when they changed their opinion. And in our time the judgement of the famous Chronologers, Scaliger, Beroaldus, Broughton, Capellus, Clopenburgius, with many others, are not contemptible, as set against such an unproved Assertion as this.   

Sect. 8.  
[That our sinful Bodies, etc.) It can no more be said, those words do give greater efficacy to the blood, then to the body of Christ, then when our Lord saith, This is my blood which is shed for you, and for many, for the remission of sins, etc. And saith not so explicitly of the Body.]   

Reply.  
Sure Christ there intimateth no such distinction as is here intimated: there his body is said to [be broken for us] and not only for [our bodies]   

Sect. 9 20. Com. Kneel.  
[It is most requisite that the Minister deliver the Bread and Wine into every particular Communicant's band, and repeat the words in the singular number; for so much as it is the propriety of Sacraments to make particular obsignation to each Believer, and it is our visible profession, that by the Grace of God, Christ tasted death for every man.   

Reply. 1.  
Did not Christ know the propriety of Sacraments better than we, and yet he delivered it in the plural number to all at once, with a [take ye, eat ye, drink ye [all of it]; we had rather study to be obedient to our Master, than to be wiser than he. 2. As God maketh the general Offer, which giveth to no man a personal interest, till his own acceptance first appropriate it; so it is fit, that the Minister that is God's Agent, imitate him, when his example, and the reason of it so concern to engage us to it; Clemens Alexandr. Stromat. lib. 1. Prope. In it giveth a reason (as we understand him) for the contrary; that man being a free Agent, must be the chooser or refuser for himself,— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Quemadmodum eucharistiam cum quidam, ut mos est diviserint, permittunt unicuique ex populo ejus partem sumere: and after rendereth this reason, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad accuratè enim perfecteque eligendum ac fugiendum, optima est conscientia.  
And that thing is so agreeable to your own doctrinal principles, that we fear you dis-relish it, because it comes from us.   

Sect. 10. Kneel at Sacra.  
[Concerning Kneeling at the Sacrament we have given account already: only thus much we add, that we conceive it an error to say that the Scripture affirms the Apostles to have received not-kneeling. The posture of the Paschal Supper we know, but the institution of the holy Sacrament was after Supper; and what posture was then used the Scripture is silent. The Rubr. at the end of the 1. Ed. C. that leaves kneeling, crossing, etc. indifferent, is meant only at such times as they are not prescribed, and required. But at the Eucharist, kneeling is expressly required in the Rubr. following.]   

Reply.  
Doubtless, when Matthew and Mark say it was [as they did eat] to which before it is said, that [they sat down]; and when Interpreters generally agree upon it, this would easily have satisfied you, if you had been as willing to believe it, as to believe the contrary. Matth. 26. 20, 21, 26. the same phrase is used v. 26. As  
In vers. 21. where it showeth, they were still sitting: For the sense of the Rubr. if you prove that the makers so interpret it, we shall not deny it; but the reason of both seems the same.   

Sect. 11. Com. three times a Year.  
[This desire to have the Parishioners at liberty, whether they will ever receive the Communion or not, savours of too much neglect, and coldness of affection towards the holy Sacrament: It is more fitting that order should be taken to bring it into more frequent use, as it was in the first, and best times; Our Rubr. is directly according to the ancient Council of Eliberis C. 81. Gratian. de Consecrat. no man is to be accounted a good Catholic Christian that does not receive three times in the year: The distempers which indispose men to it, must be corrected, not the receiving of the Sacrament therefore omitted: It 
Hooker. l. 5. Sect. 6. 8.  is a pitiful pretence to say, they are not fit, and make their sin their excuse; Formerly our Church was quarrelled at for not compelling men to the Communion, now for urging men; how should she please?   

Reply.  
We confess it is desirable that all our distempers, and unfitnesses should be healed; and we desire with you that Sacraments may be oftener: But that every person in the Parish that is unfit, be forced to receive, is that which we cannot concur with you to be guilty of. Two sorts we think unfit, to be so forced (at least.) First, abundance of people, grossly ignorant and scandalous, that will eat and drink judgement to themselves, not discerning the Lords Body. Secondly, many melancholy, and otherwise troubled doubting Souls, that if they should receive the Sacrament before they find themselves more fit, would be in danger to go out of their wits, with fear, lest it would seal them to destruction, and as the Liturgy saith, lest the Devil enter into them as into Judas: or at least it would grievously deject them. As formerly, so now, there is great reason at once to desire, that the unprepared be not forced to the Sacrament, and yet that so great a part of the body of the Church may not be let alone in your Communion, without due admonition and discipline, that ordinarily neglect or refuse the Church's Communion in this Sacrament: those that are so profane should be kept away, but withal they should be proceeded with by discipline, till they repent, or are cast out of the Church.   

Sect. 12.  
[This Rubr. is not in the Liturgy of Queen Elizabeth, nor confirmed by Law, nor is there any great need of restoring it; the World being now in more danger of profanation, then of Idolatry: besides the sense of it, is declared sufficiently in the 28. Article of the Church of England: The time appointed we conceive sufficient.]   

Reply.  
Can there be any hurt or danger in the people's being taught to understand the Church aright? Hath not Bishop Hall taught you in his life of a Romanist, that would have faced him down, That the Church of England is for Transubstantiation, because of Kneeling, p. 20. And the same Bishop (greatly differing from you) saith in the same Book, p 294. But to put all scruples out of the mind of any Reader concerning this point, let that serve for the upshot of all, which is expressly set down in the fifth Rubric in the end of the Communion set forth, as the judgement of the Church of England, both in King Edward and Queen Elizabeth's times (note that) though lately upon negligence (note upon negligence) omitted in the Impression] and so recites the words. Where you say, there is no great need, etc. We reply, 1. Profaneness may be opposed nevertheless for our instructing the people against Idolatry. 2. The abounding of Papists who in this point seem to us Idolatrous, showeth that there is danger of it. 3. The commonness of Idolatry through the World, and the case of the Israelites of old, show that man's nature is prone to it. 4. Profaneness and Idolatry befriend each other; As God is jealous against Idolatry, so should all faithful Pastors of the Church be, and not refuse such a caution to the people and say, There is no great need of it.   

Public Baptism.  
Until they have made due profession of Repentance, etc. We think this desire to be very hard and uncharitable, punishing the poor Infants for the Parent's sakes; and giving also too great and arbitrary a power to judge which of his Parishioners he pleaseth, Atheists, 〈…〉 Heretics, etc. and then in that name to reject their children from b 〈…〉 Baptised: Our Church concludes more charitably, that Christ will 〈…〉 vourably accept every Infant to Baptism, that is presented by the Church according to our present Order: And this she concludes out of Holy Scriptures, (as you may see in the Office of Baptism) according to the Practice and Doctrine of the Catholic Church, Cypr. Ep. 59 August. Ep. 28. & the verb. Apost. Ser. 14.   

Reply.  
We perceive you will stick with us in more than Ceremonies; To your reasons we Reply, 1. By that reason, all the Children of all Heathens or Infidels in the World should be admitted to Baptism; because they should not be punished for the parents' sakes. 2. But we deny that it is (among Christians that believe original Sin) any absurdity to say, that Children are punished for their Parents sakes. 3. But yet we deny this to be any such punishment at all, unless you will call, their non-deliverance a punishment. They are the Children of wrath by nature, and have original Sin; The Covenant of Grace that giveth the saving benefits of Christ, is made to none but the faithful, and their seed; Will you call this a punishing them for their Father's sakes, that God hath extended his Covenant to no more? Their Parent's infidelity doth but leave them in their original Sin, and Misery, and is not further itself imputed to them. If you know of any Covenant or promise of Salvation made to all without condition, or to Infants, or any other condition or qualification, but that they be the seed of the faithful dedicated to God; you should do well to show it us, and not so slightly pass things of so great moment, in which you might much help the World out of darkness, if you can make good what you intimate; If indeed you mean as you seem to speak, That its uncharitableness to punish any Infants for the Parent's faults, & that a non-liberation is such a punishment; than you must suppose that all the Infants of Heathens, Jews, & Turks are saved (that die in Infancy), or else Christ is uncharitable; And if they are all saved without Baptism, than Baptism is of no such use, or necessity; as you seem to think: What then is their privilege, of the seed of the faithful, that they are holy, and that the Covenant is made with them, & God will be their God? We fear you will again revive the opinion of the Anabaptists among the people, when they observe that you have no more to say for the Baptising of the Children of the faithful, then of Infidles, Heathens, & Atheists. To your second Objection we Answer; You will drive many a faithful labourer from the work of Christ, if he may not be in the Ministry, unless he will baptise the Children of Heathens, Infidels, and Excommunicate ones, before their Parents do repent: And the first Question is not, Who shall be the judge? But, whether we must be all thus forced? Is not the Question as great, Who shall be the judge of the unfitness of Persons for the Lords Supper? And yet, there, you think it not a taking too much upon us to keep away the scandalous, if they have their Appeals to you? And is it indeed (a power too great & arbitrary) to have a judiciam discretionis about our own Acts; and not to be forced to baptise the children of Heathens against our Consciences? Who judged for the Baptizers in the Primitive Church, what persons they should baptise? We act but as Engines under you, not as Men, if we must not use our Reason; and we are more miserable than brutes or men, if we must be forced to go against our Consciences, unless you will save us harmless before God: O that in a fair debate you would prove to us that such children as are described are to be baptised, and that the Ministers that baptise them, must not have power to discern whom to baptise. But who mean you by the Churches, that must present every Infant that Christ may accept them? Is every Infant first in the promise of pardon? (If so, show us that promise) and then sure God will make good that promise, though Heathen Parents present not their children to him, (as your grounds suppose); if not, then will the sign save those that are not in the promise: But is it the Godfathers that are the Church? Who ever called them so? And if by the Church you mean the Minister, and by presenting, you mean baptising them, than any Heathen's child that a Minister can catch up and baptise shall be saved: which if it could be proved, would persuade us to go hunt for children in Turkey, Tartary, or America, and secretly baptise them in a habit, that should not make us known. But there is more of fancy then charity in this; and Christ never invited any to him, but the children of the promise to be thus presented and baptised.   

Sect. 3. P. 23.  
[And than the Godfathers, etc.) It is an erroneous doctrine, and the ground of many others, and of many of your Exceptions, that children have no other right to Baptism then in their Parents right. The Churches Primitive practice 
S. Aug. Ep. 23.  forbids it to be left to the pleasure of Parents, whether there shall be other Sareties or no? It is fit we should observe carefully the practice of venerable Antiquity, as they desire Prop. 18.]   

Reply.  
We conjecture the words that conclude your former Subject being misplaced, are intended as your Answer to this: and if all the children of any sort in the world that are brought to us, must by us be baptised without distinction, indeed it's no great matter what time we have notice of it.  
It seems we differ in Doctrine, though we subscribe the same Articles we earnestly desire you distinctly to tell us, What is the Infant's title: to Baptism, if it be not to be found in the Parent? Assign it, and prove it when you have done, as well as we prove their right as they are (the seed of Believers dedicated by them to God), and then we promise to consent: It's strange to us to hear so much of the Churches Primitive practice, where so little evidence of it is produced, Aug. ep. 23. talketh not of Primitive practice: Ab initio non fuit sic; Was it so in the Apostles days? And afterwards you prove not that it was the judgement of the Catholic Church, that bare Sponsors instead of Parents. Pro-parents or Owners of the Children, might procure to the Children of all Infidels a title to Baptism, and its benefits. Such Susceptors as became the Owners or Adopters of the Children, are to be distinguished from those that pro forma stand by for an hour during the Baptising of the Children, and ever after leave them to their Parents: who as they have the natural interest in them, and power of their disposal, and the Education of them, so are fittest to covenant in their names.   

[The Font usually stands as it did in Primitive times, at or near the Church door, to signify that Baptism was the entrance into the Church mystical, we are all baptised into one body, 1 Cor. 12. 13. and the people may hear well enough. If Jordan and all other waters be not so far sanctified by Christ, as to be the matter of Baptism, what authority have we to baptise? and sure his Baptism was Dedicatio Baptismi.]   

Reply. Our less difference of the Font, and flood Jordan, is almost drowned in the greater before going: But to the first we say that we conceive the usual situation for the people's hearing, is to be preferred before your Ceremonious position of it. And to the second we say, that Dedicatio Baptismi, is an unfitting phrase: and yet, if it were not, what's that to the sanctification of Jordan, and all other waters? Did Christ sanctify all Corn or Bread, or Grapes or Wine to an holy use, when he administered the Lords Supper? Sanctifying is separating to an holy use; But the flood Jordan and all other water, is not separated to this holy use, in any proper sense: No more than all mankind is sanctified to the Priestly office, because men were made Priests.   

[It hath been accounted reasonable, and allowed by the best Laws, that Guardians should Covenant and contract for their Minors to their benefit: by the same right, the Church hath appointed sureties to undertake for Children, when they enter into Covenant with God by Baptism; And this general practice of the Church is enough to satisfy those that doubt.]   

Repl. 1. Who made those Sureties Guardians of the Infants that are neither Parents, nor Pro-parents, nor Owners of them? We are not now speaking against Sponsors: But you know that the very original of those Sponsors, is a great Controversy: And whether they were not at first most properly Sponsors for the Parents that they should perform that part they undertook (because many Parents were Desertors, and many proved negligent) Sponsors than excluded not Parents from their proper undertaking, but joined with them; Godfathers are not the Infant's Guardians with us and therefore have not power thus to Covenant and Vow in their name: We entreat you to take heed of leaving any Children indeed out of the mutual Covenant that are baptised; How are those in the Covenant that cannot consent themselves, and do it not by any that truly represent them, nor have any Authority to act as in their names? The Authority of Parents being most unquestionable (who by nature, and the word of God, have the power of disposing of their Children, and consequently of choosing and covenanting for them), Why should it not be preferred? at lest you may give leave to those Parents that desire it, to be the Dedicators of, and Covenanters for, their own Children, and not force others on them whether they will or no. 2. But the question is not of Covenanting, but professing present actual believing, forsaking, etc. In which, though we believe the Church's sense was sound, yet we desire that all things, that may render it liable to misunderstanding, may be avoided.   

Receive remission of sins by spiritual Regeneration]. Most proper for Baptism 
Sect 6. pag. 24.  is our spiritual Regeneration, S. John 3. Unless a man be born again of Water and the Spirit, etc. And by this is received remission of sins, Acts 2. 3. Repent, and be baptised every one of you, for the remission of sins 's So the Creed [one Baptism for the remission of sins.]   

Repl. Baptism, as an outward Administration, is our visible Sacramental Regeneration: Baptism as containing, with the Sign, the thing signified, is our spiritual real Regeneration. As we are regenerated before Baptism, (as, you know, adult Believers are), so we cannot pray to receive remission of sins by that same Regeneration renewed. As we are regenerated really in Baptism; that Regeneration and Remission, are conjunct benefits: But if Baptism at once give Regeneration and Remission, it follows not that it gives Remission by Regeneration: But as Regeneration comprehendeth the whole change (real or Physical) and relative; so we acknowledge, that as the part is given by the whole, you may say that Remission is given by Regeneration, but more fitly in it than by it; But we are not willing to make more ado about words than needs.   

[We cannot in faith say that every Child that is baptised is regenerate, etc.]. 
Sect. 7. pag 24.  Seeing that God's Sacraments have their effects, where the Receiver doth not ponere obicem, put any bar against them (which children cannot do); we may say in faith of every child that is baptised, that it is regenerated by God's Holy Spirit, and the denial of it tends to Anabaptism, and the contempt of this holy Sacrament, as nothing worthy nor material, whether it be administered to children or no: Concerning the Cross, we refer to our Answer to the same in general.  
Repl. All God's Sacraments attain their proper end: But whether the Infants of Infidels be the due Subjects, and whether their ends be to seal up Grace and Salvation to them that have no promise of it, or whether it be only to seal the Covenant to believers and their seed, are Questions yet 
Tit. 3. 5.  undecided, wherein we must entreat you not to expect that we should implicitly believe you; and it is as easy for us to tell you, that you are promoting Anabaptism, and much more easy to prove it: We take those but for words of course.    

PRIVATE BAPTISM.  

[We desire that Baptism may not be administered in a private place]. And so 
Sect 8.  do we, where it may be brought into the public Congregation. But since our Lord hath said, S. Joh 3. Unless one be born of Water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter into the Kingdom of Heaven. We think it fit that they should be Baptised in private, rather than not at all; It is appointed now to be done by the lawful Minister.   

Repl. We must needs suppose you are disputing with Protestants, who ordinarily show the Papists that that Text, Joh. 3. asserteth no absolute necessity of Baptism to salvation. But we believe as well as you, that it is the regular way of solemn Initiation into the Covenant and Church of Christ, which none that indeed are the Children of the promise should neglect. As Coronation solemnizeth his entrance upon the Kingdom, that had before the title; And as Marriage solemnizeth that which before was done by consent; So Baptism solemnizeth the mutual Covenant, which before had a mutual consent, and none is authorised to consent for Infants but those that by nature, and God's Law, have the power of disposing of them, and whose will is in sensu-forensi, the children's will: It solemnly investeth us in what we had an Antecedent right to, and therefore belongs to none but those that have that right; And this we are ready to make good by any fair Debate that you will allow us.   

[Nor is any thing done in private reiterated in public, but the solemn reception into the Congregation, with the prayers for him, and the public declaration before the Congregation of the Infants now made by the Godfathers, that the whole Congregation may testify against him, if he does not perform it, which the Ancients made great use of.   

[Repl. Do you not say in the Rubr. (And let them not doubt, but the Child so baptised is lawfully and sufficiently baptised, and ought not to be baptised again). And after (I certify you that in this case all is well done, etc.) And yet you do not renew all the Baptismal Covenant, renouncing the flesh, etc. and engaging into the Christian belief; And that you may see that the Church of England taketh not all Infants infallibly to be regenerated by Baptism (unless you grant that they repent to the substance of Baptism) the Baptismal prayer is here used, for the fore-baptized, [that God will give his holy Spirit to this Infant, that he being born again, and made heir of everlasting Salvation, etc.] which showeth that he is now supposed to be Regenerandus, non regeneratus. Do they pray for his Regeneration, whom they account regenerate already? You must either confess that there they repeat much of the substance of Baptism, and take the Child as not baptised, or else that they take the baptised Child to be not-regenerate. And then we may well take them for unregnerate, that show no signs of it, at years of discretion, but live a carnal and ungodly life, though they can say the Catechism, and seek Confirmation.    

Of the CATECHISM.  

[Though divers have been of late baptised without Godfathers, yet many have been baptised with them, and those may answer the Questions, as they are: 
Sect, 1. p. 2. 26. An. 3.  the rest must answer, according to truth. But there's no reason to alter the Rule of the Catechism, for some men's irregularities.   

Reply. If you will have a Catechism proper to those that had Godfathers, give leave to others to use one that will teach them, as you say, to answer according to truth: And let us, in the same, have that liberty, of leaving out the doubtful Opinion of Godfathers and Godmothers, and that which we think too childish a beginning, [What is your name,] and let us use one that speaks more of the necessary Doctrines of Salvation, and nothing but Necessaries.   

[We conceive this expression as safe as that which they desire, and more fully expressing the Efficacy of the Sacrament, according to S. Paul, the 26, and 
Sect. A. 2.  27. of Gal. 3. Where S. Paul proves them all to be Children of God, because they were baptised, and in their Baptism had put on Christ; If Children, than Heirs, or, which is all one, Inheritors, Rom. 8. 17.   

Reply. By Baptism Paul means not the Carcase of Baptism, but the Baptismal dedication, and covenanting with God; They that do this by themselves, if at age, or by Parents, or Pro-parents authorized (if Infants) sincerely, are truly members of Christ, and children of God, and Heirs of Heaven; They that do this but hypocritically, and verbally, as Simon Magus did, are visibly such as the others are really. But really are still in the gall of bitterness, and bond of iniquity, and have no part or lot in this business, their hearts being not right in the sight of God. This is that truth which we are ready to make good.   

[We conceive the present Translation to be agreeable to many antie●● Copies, therefore the change to be needless.]   

Repl. What ancient Copy hath (the Seventh day) in the end of the 
Cor.  fourth Commandment, instead of the Sabbath day? Did King James cause the Bible to be new translated to so little purpose? We must bear you witness, that in some Cases you are not given to change.   

[My duty towards God, etc.] It is not true that there is nothing in that Answer which refers to the 4th Commandment; for the last words of the Answer 
Sect. 4 pag. 27.  do orderly relate to the last Commandment of the first Table, which is the fourth.   

Repl. And think you, indeed, that the 4th. Commandment obligeth you no more to one day in seven, than equally (to all the days of your life)? This Exposition may make us think that some are more serious, than else we could have imagined in praying after that Commandment, Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this Law.   

[Two only as generally necessary to salvation, etc. These words are a Reason of the Answer that there are two only, and therefore not to be left out.] 
Sect. 5.    

Repl. The words seem to imply by distinction, that there may be others not so necessary: and the Lords Supper was not by the Ancients taken to be necessary to the salvation of all.   

[We desire that the entering of Infants, etc.] The effect of children's Baptism, 
Sect. 6.  depends neither upon their own present actual Faith and Repentance, which the Catechism saith expressly, they cannot perform; nor upon the Faith and Repentance of their natural Parents, or Pro-parents, or of their Godfathers or Godmothers; but upon the Ordinance and Institution of Christ: But it is requisite that when they come to age, they should perform these Conditions of Faith and Repentance, for which also their Godfathers and Godmothers charitably undertaken on their behalf. And what they do for the Infant in this Case, the Infant himself is truly said to do, as in the Courts of this Kingdom daily, the Infant does answer by his Guardian, and it is usual for to do homage by proxy, and for Princes to marry by proxy. For the further justification of this Answer, See St. Aug. Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Nihil aliud credere quam sidem habere; ac per hoc cum respondetur Parvulum credere qui fidei nondum habet effectum, respondetur Fidem habere propter fidei Sacramentum, & convertere se ad Deum propter Conversionis Sacramentum, quia & ipsa responsio ad celebrationem pertinet Sacramenti: itaque parvulum, etsi nondum fides illa, quae in credentium voluntate consistit, tamen ipsius sidei Sacramentum, fidelem facit.]   

Repl. 1. You remove not all the inconvenience of the words that seemeth to import what you yourselves disclaim. 2. We know that the effects of Baptism, do depend on all the necessary concauses on God's mercy, or Christ's merits, on the Institution, and on Baptism itself according to its use, as a delivering investing Sign, and Seal; and they depend upon the promise sealed by Baptism; and the promise supposeth the qualified subject, or requisite Condition in him, that shall have the benefit of it. To tell us therefore of a common Cause, on which the effect depends, viz. the Institution of Baptism itself, when we are enquiring after the special condition that proveth the person to be the due subject, to whom both Promise and Baptism doth belong; This is but to seem to make an Answer. Either all baptised absolutely are justified and saved, or not: If yea, then Christianity is another kind of thing than Peter or Paul understood, that thought it was not the Washing of water, but the Answer of a good Conscience to God: Then let us catch Heathens and dip them, and save them in despite of them; But if any condition be requisite (as we are sure there is) our Question is, What it is? and you tell us of Baptism itself. Did ever August jure, vel injuria was to be esteemed a Believer? We grant with Austin, that Infants of Believers, propter Sacramentum fidei, are visibly and professedly to be numbered with Believers; but neither Austin, nor we, will ever grant you that this is true of all that you can catch, and use this form of Baptism over. The Seal will not save them that have no part in the Promise.   

[The Catechism is not intended as a whole Body of Divinity; but as a Comprehension 
Sect. 7. pa. 28.  of the Articles of Faith, and other Doctrines most necessary to Salvation; and being short, is fittest for Children, and Common people; and as it was thought sufficient upon mature deliberation, and so is by us.]   

Repl. The Creed, the Decalogue, and the Lords Prayer, contain all that is absolutely necessary to Salvation at least. If you intended no more, What need you make a Catechism? If you intent more, Why have you no more? But, except in the very words of the Creed, the essentials of Christianity are left out; If no explication be necessary, trouble them with no more than the Text of the Creed, etc. If explication be necessary, let them have it; At least in a larger Catechism, fitter for the riper.    

CONFIRMATION.  

[It is evident that the meaning of these words is, that Children Baptised, 
Sect. 1. Rub. 1.  and dying before they commit actual Sin, are undoubtedly Saved, though they be not Confirmed; wherein we see not what danger there can be of misleading the vulgar, by teaching them truth: But there may be danger in this desire of having these words expunged, as if they were false; for St. Austin says, He is an Infidel that desires them to be true, Ep. 23. ad Bonifac.]   

Repl. What? all Children Saved whether they be Children of the Promise or no? Or, can you show us a Text that saith (Whoever is Baptised, shall be Saved)? The Common-Prayer-Book plainly speaks of the nonnecessity of Unction, Confirmation, and other Popish Ceremonies and Sacraments, and meaneth that, ex parte Ecclesiae, they have all things necessary to Salvation, and are undoubtedly Saved, supposing them the due Subjects, and that nothing be wanting ex parte sui; which certainly is not the case of such as are not Children of the Promise, and Covenant. The Child of an Heathen doth not ponere obicem actually quo minus baptizetur, and yet being baptised is not saved, on your own reckoning, (as we understand you); therefore the Parent can ponere obicem, and either hinder the Baptism or effect, to his Infant. Austin speaks not there of all Children whatever, but those that are offered per aliorum spiritualem voluntatem, by the Parents usually, or by those that own them after the Parents be dead, or they exposed, or become theirs: He speaks also of what may be done, & de eo quod fieri non posse arbitratur: But our question is, What is done? and not, What God can do: Our great Question is, What Children they be that Baptism belongeth to?   

[After the Catechism we conceive that it is not a sufficient qualification, etc.] We conceive that this qualification is required rather as necessary, than 
Sect. 2. Rubr.  as sufficient; and therefore it is the duty of the Minister of the place, Can. 61. to prepare Children in the best manner to be presented to the Bishop for Confirmation, and to inform the Bishop of their fitness; but submitting the judgement to the Bishop, both of this, and other qualifications, and not that the Bishop should be tied to the Ministers consent. Compare this Rubr. to the second Rubr. before the Catechism, and there is required what is further necessary and sufficient.   

Repl. 1. If we have all necessary ordinarily, we have that which is sufficient ad esse: there is more ordinarily necessary, than to say those words. 2. Do you owe the King no more obedience? Already do you contradict His Declaration, which saith, Confirmation shall be performed (by the information, and with the consent of the Minister of the place?) But if the Minister's consent shall not be necessary, take all the charge upon your own souls, and let your souls be answerable for all.   

They see no need of Godf. here] The Compilers of the Liturgy did, and so doth the Church; that there may be a witness of the Confirmation.] 
Sect. 3. Ex. 1▪    

Repl. It is like to be your own work as you will use it, and we cannot hinder you from doing it in your own way. But are Godfathers no more than witnesses? etc.   

[This supposeth that all children, etc.] It supposeth, and that truly, that all children were at their Baptism, regenerate by Water, and the Holy Ghost, and had given unto them the forgiveness of all their Sins; and it is charitably presumed, that, notwithstanding the frailties and slips of their Childhood, they have not totally lost, what was in Baptism conferred upon them, and therefore adds, Strengthen them we beseech thee, O Lord, with the Holy Ghost, the Comforter, and daily increase in them their manifold gifts of Grace, etc. None that lives in open sin ought to be Confirmed.]   

Repl. 1. Children baptised without right, cannot be presumed to be really regenerate, and pardoned. 2. We speak only of those that by living in open sin, do show themselves to be unjustified; and these you confess should not be Confirmed. O that you would but practise that; If not, this Confession will witness against you.   

[Before the imposition of hands, etc.] Confirmation is reserved to the 
Sect. 5. p. 30. Rub.  Bishop, in honorem Ordinis; To bless, being an Act of Authority; so was it of old. St. Hierom, Dialog. Adu. Lucifer. says, it was totius orbis consensio in hanc partem. And St. Cyprian to the same purpose, Ep. 73. And our Church doth every where profess, as she ought, to conform to the Catholic usages of the Primitive times; from which causelessly to depart, argues rather love of contention than of peace. The reserving of Confirmation to the Bishop, doth argue the Dignity of the Bishop above Presbyters, who are not allowed to Confirm; but does not argue any excellency in Confirmation, above the Sacraments. St. Hierom argues the quite contrary, ad Lucif. cap. 4. That because Baptism was allowed to be performed by a Deacon, but Confirmation only by a Bishop; therefore Baptism was most necessary, and of the greatest value; The mercy of God allowing the most necessary means of Salvation, to be administered by inferior Orders, and restraining the less necessary, to the higher, for the honour of their Order.]   

Reply. O that we had the Primitive Episcopacy, and that Bishops had no more Churches to oversee, than in the Primitive times they had; and then we would never speak against this reservation of Confirmation to the honour of the Bishop: But when that Bishop of one Church, is turned into that Bishop of many hundred Churches; and when he is now a Bishop of the lowest rank, that was an Archbishop, when Archbishops first came up, and so we have not really existent, any mere Bishops, (such as the Ancients knew) at all, but only Archbishops and their Curates; Marvel not, if we would not have Confirmation proper to Archbishops, nor one man undertake more than an hundred can perform: But if you will do it, there is no remedy, we have acquit ourselves.   

Prayer after the Imposition of hands, is grounded upon the practice of the 
Sect. 6. Ex. 1.  Apostles, Heb. 6. 2. & Acts 8. 17. Nor doth 25. Article say, that Confirmation is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice, but that the 5. commonly called Sacraments have ground partly on the corrupt following the Apostles, etc. which may be applied to some other of those 5; but cannot be applied to Confirmation, unless we make the Church speak contradictions.   

Reply. But the question is not of Imposition of hands in general; but this Imposition in particular: And you have never proved, that this sort of Imposition, called Confirmation, is mentioned in those Texts: And the 25. Article cannot more probably be thought to speak of any one of the 5. as proceeding from the corrupt imitation of the Apostles, than of Confirmation as a supposed Sacrament.   

We know no harm in speaking the language of holy Scripture, Acts 8. 15. 
Sect. 7. Ex. 2.  they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost; and though Impositions of hands be not a Sacrament, yet it is a very fit sign, to certify the persons what is then done for them, as the Prayer speaks.   

Reply. It is fit to speak the Scripture language in Scripture sense; But if those that have no such power to give the Holy Ghost, will say, Receive the Holy Ghost, it were better for them to abuse other language, than Scripture language.    

After Confirmation.  

There is no inconvenience that Confirmation should be required before the 
Sect. 8.  Communion, when it may be ordinarily obtained: that which you here fault, you elsewhere desire.   

Reply. We desire that, the credible approved profession of Faith, and repentance, be made necessaries: But not that all the thousands in England that never yet came under the Bishop's hands (as not one of many ever did, even when they were at the highest) may be kept from the Lords Supper: for some cannot have that Imposition, and others will not, that yet are fit for Communion with the Church.   

The Ring is a significant sign, only of humane institution, and was always 
Marriage the Ring. Sect. 1. p. 31.  given as a pledge of fidelity, and constant love, and here is no reason given why it should be taken away; nor are the reasons mentioned in the Roman Ritualits' given in our Common-Prayer-Book.   

Repl. We crave not your own forbearance of the Ring; but the indifferency in our use of a thing so misused, and unnecessary.   

[These words (in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) if they seem to make Matrimony a Sacrament; may as well make all sacred, yea civil actions 
Sect. 2. p●. 32. Ex. 1.  of weight to be Sacraments, they being usual at the beginning and ending of all such. It was never heard before now, that those words make a Sacrament.]   

Reply. Is there no force in an argument drawn from the appearance of evil, the offence and the danger of abuses, when other words enough may serve turn?  
They go to the Lords Table, because the Communion is to follow.   

Reply. They must go to the Table, whether there be a Communion 
Sect. 3.  or not.   

[Consecrated the estate of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery, etc.] Though the institution of Marriage was before the Fall, yet it may be now, and 
Se. 4. Col.  is consecrated by God to such an excellent mystery, as the representation of the spiritual marriage, between Christ and his Church, Eph. 5. 23. We are sorry that the words of Scripture, will not please. The Church in the 25. Article, hath taken away the fear of making it for a Sacrament.]   

Reply. When was Marriage thus consecrated? If all things, used to set forth Christ's offices, or benefits, by way of similitude, be consecrated; then a Judge, a Father, a Friend, a Vine, a Door, a Way, etc. are all consecrated things: Scripture phrase pleaseth us, in Scripture sense.   

The new married persons the same day of their marriage must receive the 
Se. 5. p. 33. Rubr. 18.  Holy Communion.] This enforces none to forbear Marriage, but presumes (as well it may) that all persons marriageable ought to be also fit to receive the Holy Sacrament; And marriage being so solemn a Covenant of God, they that undertake it in the fear of God, will not stick to seal it by receiving the Holy Communion, and accordingly prepare themselves for it. Is were more Christian, to desire that those licentious Festivities might be suppressed, and the Communion more generally used by those that marry: the happiness would be greater than can easily be expressed. Unde sufficiat ad enarrandum felicitatem ejus Matrimonii, quod Ecclesia conciliat, & confirmat oblatio. Tertul. lib. 2. ad Uxorem.   

Reply. Indeed! will you phrase and modify your administrations upon such a supposition, that all men are such as they ought to be, and do what they ought to do? Then take all the World for Saints, and use them accordingly, and blot out the doctrine of Reproof, excommunication, and damnation from your Bibles; Is it not most certain that very many married persons are unfit for the Lords Supper, and will be when you and we have done our best? And is it fit then to compel them to it? But the more unexpected the more welcome is your motion, of that more Christian course of suppressing of licentious festivities. When shall we see such Reformation undertaken?    

Visitation of the Sick:  

FOr as much as the condition, etc.] All which is here desired, is already 
Sect. 1.  presumed, namely, that the Minister shall apply himself to the particular condition of the person; but this must be done according to the Rule of prudence and justice, and not according to his pleasure: therefore if the sick person show himself truly penitent, it ought not to be left to the Ministers pleasure to deny him Absolution, if he desire it. Our Church's direction, is according to the 13. Can. of the venerable Council of Nice, both here, and in the next that follows.   

Reply. But the question is whether he show himself truly penitent or not. If we have not here neither, a judgement of discretion, for the conduct of our own actions, What do we with reason? Why are we trusted in the Office? and, Whose judgement must we follow? The Bishop cannot have leisure to become the Judge whether this man be penitent. It must then be the Minister, or the man himself; And must we absolve every man that saith he repenteth? Then we must believe an incredible profession, which is against reason: Some are known Infidels, and in their health profess that they believe not the Scripture to be true, and make a mock at Jesus Christ; and perhaps, in a sickness, that they apprehend no danger in, will send for the Minister in scorn, to say [I repent] and force him to absolve them, that they may deride him, and the Gospel. Some of us have known too many of those that have for twenty, or thirty years been common drunkards, seldom sober a week together, and still say when they came to themselves, that they were sorry for it, and did unfeignedly repent; and as they said in health, so they said in sickness, dying with in a few days or weeks after they were last drunk: must we absolve all these? Some dye with a manifest hatred of an Holy Life, reviling at those that are careful to please God; yet saying, they hate them not as holy, but because they are all Hypocrites, or the like: And yet will say, they repent of their sins. Some forbear not their accustomed swearing and cursing while they profess repentance. Some make no restitution for the wrong which they say they repent of: And must we take all these for truly penitent? If not; the Minister must judge. What you mean by your saying, (Our Church's direction is according to the 13th Canon of the venerable Council of Nice, both here and in the next that follows) we know not: the second Council of Nice you cannot mean (its Can. being uncertain) and the 13th is of no such sense. And the 13th Can. of the first Council of Nice, is only, that lapsed Catechumen shall be 3, years inter and ientes before they pray again with the Catechumen. This shows they then took not up with every word of seeming penitence as true repentance, but what it is to your purpose we know not, nor is here any other Can. in that Council for you: The 11th Can. is sufficiently against you. The lapsed that truly repent, were to remain among the penitent for three years; and seven years more, if they were fideles, etc. (Ab omnibus vero illud praecipue observetur, ut animus eorum, & fructus poenitentiae attendatur: quicunque enim cum omni timore, & lacrimis perseverantibus, & operibus bonis, Conversationem suam, non verbis solis sed opere & veritate demonstrant, cum tempus statutum etiam ab his fuerit impletum, & orationibus jam coeperint communicare, licebit etiam Episcopo humanius circa res aliquot cogitare:) We know this rigour as to time was unjust, and that to the dying it was abated: but you see here that bare words (that were not by seriousness and by deeds, made credible) were not to be taken, as sufficient marks of penitence, of which it was not the person himself that was to be the Judge.   

The form of Absolution in the Liturgy, is more agreeable to the Scriptures, 
Sect. 2.  then that which they desire; it being said, in St. John 20. Whose sins you remit they are remitted, not, whose sins you pronounce remitted; and the Condition needs not to be expressed, being always necessarily understood.   

Reply. It is a Controversy among the Learnedest Expositors, how much of that of John 20. was proper to the Apostles, and such others as were then to have the spirit in an extraordinary manner, who did remit sin effectively by remitting the punishment of it, by casting out Devils, healing the sick, etc. according to that of Jam. 5. 14, 15. Is any sick among you, let him call for the Elders of the Church, and let them pray for him, and anoint him with Oil, in the name of the Lord; And the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. If besides this remitting them effectively, the rest be no other than a Ministerial pronouncing them forgiven by God according to his Covenant in the Gospel, than you cannot plead the phrase of a Text, which respecteth another way of Remission than we pretend to: But must phrase it according to the nature of the thing, and the sense of other Scriptures also that fullier open it; There are three ways of pardoning, 1. By grant or Gift, (whether by a general Act of pardon, or a particular.) 2. By sentence. 3. By execution; that is, preventing, or taking off, the penalty: The first of these is done already by God in the Gospel. The Second, God doth principally, and his Ministers instrumentally as his Messengers: The third (the taking off the penalty) they can do no otherwise in the Case before us, then by praying that God will take it off, and using his ordinary means. So that it is most evident, that this Absolution that Ministers are to perform, can be no other than to pronounce the penitent Believer to be absolved by God according to his Covenant: And if there be no other, should we not speak as intelligibly as we can? Indeed there is more in absolving the excommunicate; for then the Church both judiciously, and executively, remitteth the penalty of excommunication (to which also the Text John 20. may have much respect) but the penalty of damnation can be no otherwise remitted by us, then as is expressed. And indeed the thing is of such exceeding weight, that it behoveth us to deal as intelligibly and openly in it, as we can. And therefore we admire that you should say (the Condition needs not be expressed, being always necessarily understood) by necessarily do you mean, necessitate naturali, & irresistibili? so that all the wicked men in the world cannot choose but understand us, to speak conditionally? Surely this is none of your meaning; if it were, it were far from truth: Or do you mean not the necessitate vel actitudine eventus, but de debito ex obligatione? no doubt but it is necessary as a duty, and also ad finem as a means: And therefore it is, that we desire it may be expressed. And doubtless you think not that all men do their duties, and understand all that they ought to understand: no not in this particular. If you mean that all sick men may be rationally supposed to understand it; this can never be believed by us that are acquainted personally (and have been) with so many of whom it is not true. How many think the Minister's Absolution, and the Sacrament, will serve turn, with their unsound hypocritical repentance? how easily is that understood absolutely, or as bad, while they take you to take it for granted, that they have the Condition, which is absolutely expressed.   

It is not fit the Minister should have power to deny this viation, or holy Communion 
Sect. 3. p. 34, Exc. 1.  to any that humbly desire it, according to the Rubric; which no man disturbed in his wits can do, and whosoever does, must in charity be presumed to be penitent, and fit to receive.   

Repl. There is no condition mentioned in the Rubric, but that he (be desirous to receive the Communion in his house) humbly is not there: And why may not a man disturbed in his wits desire the Communion? you deny things that ordinarily fall out, and yet lay the weight of your Cause on that denial. But why must we give the Sacrament to those that have lived in gross ignorance, Infidelity, and profaneness, and never manifested credibly, that they repent? You say that (whosoever desireth the Sacrament, according to the Rubric, must in charity be presumed to be penitent.) But where hath God commanded or approved so blind & dangerous an act as this, under the name of Charity? the ordinary observations of our lives, is not to be confuted by men's Assertions: we know by sad experience, that there's abundance of the worst of men among us, that are desirous to receive this Sacrament when they are sick, that give no credible evidence of true repentance; but some in the ignorance, & deceit of their hearts; & some as conscious of their impiety, for which they seek any shifting remedy to quiet their Consciences, for the time, are much more eager for this Sacrament in their sickness, than many better and more penitent persons. And must we judge all these penitent, and give them the Sacrament as such? we must needs profess that we think this Course would not be the least effectual service unto Satan, to deceive poor sinners, and keep them from knowing their misery, and seeking aright after the true remedy in time. Pardon us, while we lay together the parts of your Doctrine, as we understand it here delivered; and leave it to your Consideration, what a Church, and what a Ministry it would make. 1. All Infants of any Parents in the world that we can baptise, are undoubtedly regenerate, and in a state of life, and shall be saved, if they so die. 2. The Holy Ghost, and Forgiveness of sin, being then given them; it is charitably presumed that they have not totally lost this, notwithstanding the frailties and slips of their Childhood; and so when they can say the Catechism, they are to be confirmed. 3. Being confirmed, they are to be admitted to the Lords Supper. 4. All that marry, and others, thrice a year must receive the Lords Supper (though unfit.) 5. The Minister must absolve all the sick, that say they repent: (if we understand you) for we suppose you allow not the Minister to be Judge. 6. This Absolution must be absolutely expressly (I absolve thee from all thy sins) without the Condition (if thou repent and believe.) 7. Whosoever desireth the Communion in his sickness, must in charity be presumed to be penitent, and fit to receive. 8. The Minister must not have power to forbear such Baptising, Absolving, or delivering the Communion as aforesaid (we now omit what's said of the dead at Burial.) And if this be not the ready way to hinder thousands, from the necessary knowledge of their unrenewed hearts, and lives, and from true repentance, and from valuing Christ as the Remedy, and from making a necessary preparation for death, and also the way to lay by abundance of faithful conscionable Ministers, that dare not take such a deceiving dangerous Course; we must confess ourselves much mistaken in the nature of man's corruption, and misery, and the use of God's Ordinances for his recovery.    

The Burial of the Dead.  

IT is not fit so much should be left to the discretion of every Minister: And 
Sect. 2. p. 2.  the desire that all may be said in the Church, being not pretended to be for the ease of tender Consciences, but of tender Heads, may be helped by a Cap, better than a Rubr.   

Reply. We marvel that you say nothing at all to our desire, (that it be expressed in a Rubric, that prayers and exhortations there used, be not for the benefit of the dead, but only for the instruction etc. comfort of the living.) You intent to have a very indiscreet Ministry, if such a needless Circumstance may not be left to their discretion. The contrivance of a Cap instead of a Rubr. showeth that you are all unacquainted with the subject, of which you speak: and if you speak for want of experience of the Case of Souls, as you now do about the Case of men's bodies, we could wish you some of our experience of one sort (by more Converse with all the Members of the Flock) though not of the other. But we would here put these three or four Questions to you.  
1. Whether such of ourselves as cannot stand still in the cold winter at the Grave, half so long as the Office of Burial requireth, without the certain hazard of our lives, (though while we are in motion, we can stay out longer) are bound to believe your Lordships, that a Cap will cure this better than a Rubr. though we have proved the contrary to our cost? and know it as well as we know that cold is cold Do you think no place but that which a Cap or Clothes do cover, is capable of letting in the excessively refrigerating Air?  
2. Whether a man that hath the most rational probability, if not a moral certainty, that it would be his death, or dangerous sickness (though he wore 20. Caps) is bound to obey you in this Case.  
3. Whether usually the most studious laborious Ministers, be not the most invaletudinary and infirm? And 4ly, Whether the health of such should be made a jest of, by the more healthful; and be made so light of, as to be cast away, rather than a Ceremony sometime be left to their discretion? And whether it be a sign of the right and genuine spirit of Religion, to subject to such a Ceremony, both the life of godliness, and the lives of Ministers, and the people's souls? Much of this concerneth the people also: as well as the Ministers.   

We see not why these words may not be said of any person, who we dare 
Sect 3. p. 33.  not say is damned; and it were a breach of Charity to say so, even of those whose repentance we do not see: For whether they do not inwardly, and heartily repent, even at the last act, who knows? And that God will not even then pardon them upon such repentance, who dares say? It is better to be Charitable, and hope the best, then rashly to condemn.   

Reply. We spoke of persons, living and dying in notorious sins; suppose they were whoredom, perjury, oppression, yea Infidelity, or Atheism, etc. But suppose we cannot be infallibly certain, that the man is damned, because it is possible that he may repent, though he never did express it: will you therefore take him for a brother whose soul is taken to God in mercy? You are not sure that an excommunicate person, or an Heathen, doth not truly repent after he is speechless: But will you therefore say, that all such die thus happily? This is a most delusory Principle. The Church judgeth not of things undiscovered: Non esse & non apparere, are all one as to our Judgement; we conclude not peremptorily, because we pretend not here to infallibility. As we are not sure that any man is truly penitent, that we give the Sacrament to; so we are not sure that any man dieth impenitently. But yet we must use those as penitent, that seem so to reason, judging by ordinary means, and so must we judge those as impenitent, that have declared their sin, and never declared their repentance. It seems by you, that you will form your Liturgy, so as to say, that every man is saved, that you are not sure is damned, though he show you no repentance; and so the Church shall say, that all things are, that are but possible, if they conceit that Charity requireth it. But if the living by this be kept from Conversion, and flattered into Hell, will they there call it Charity, that brought them thither? O lamentable Charity, that smoothers men's ways to Hell, and keepeth them ignorant of their danger, till they are past remedy! millions are now suffering for such a sort of Charity. Lay this to the formentioned propositions, and the world will see that indeed we differ in greater things than Ceremonies, and Forms of Prayer.    

Churching Women.  

IT is fit that the woman performing especial service of Thanksgiving, should 
Sect. 1. p. 36. Exc. 1.  have a special place for it, where she may be perspicuous to the whole Congregation; and near the Holy Table, in regard of the Offering she is there to make: They need not fear Popery in this, since in the Church of Rome she is to kneel at the Church door.   

Reply. Those that are delivered from impenitency, from sickness, etc. perform a special service of thanksgiving, etc. yet need not stand in a special place: but if you will have all your Ceremonies, Why must all others be forced to imitate you? We mentioned not the Church of Rome.   

[The Psalm 121. is more fit and pertinent, than those others named, as 113, 
Sect. 2. Exc. 2.  128. and therefore not to be changed.]   

Reply. We have poposed to you what we think meetest in our last pages; if you like your own better, we pray you give us leave to think otherwise, and to use what we propounded.   

If the woman be such as is here mentioned, she is to do her penance before she 
Sect. 3. Exc. 3.  be Churched.]   

Reply. That is, if she be accused, prosecuted, and judged by the Bishop's Court to do penance first, which happeneth not to one of a multitude; and what shall the Minister do with all the rest? All tends to take away the difference between the precious and the vile, between those that fear God, and that fear him not.   

[Offerings are required as well under the Gospel, as the Law: and amongst other times most fit it is, that oblations should be, when we come to give thanks 
Sect. 4. Exc. 4.  for some special Blessing, Psal. 76. 10, 11. Such is the deliverance in Childbearing.]   

Reply. Oblations should be free, and not forced: to some special use, and not to ostentation.   

[This is needless since the Rubr. and Comm. require that no notorious person 
Sect. 5. Exc. 5.  be admitted.]   

Reply. We gladly accept so fair an interpretation, as freeth the Book from self-contradiction, and us from trouble; but we think it would do no hurt but good, to be more express.    

The Concessions.  

WE are willing that all the Epistles and Gospels be used according to 
Sect. 1.  the last Translation.   

Reply. We still beseech you, that all the Psalms, and other Scriptures in the Liturgy recited, may (for the same reason) be used according to the last Translation.   

That when any thing is read for an Epistle, which is not in the Epistles, the Superscription be, [for the Epistle.] 
Sect. 2.    

Repl. We beseech you, speak as the vulgar may understand you: [for the Epistle] signifieth not plain enough to such, that is indeed none of the Epistles.   

That the Psalms be collated with the former Translation, mentioned in 
Sect. 3.  Rubr. and Printed according to it.   

Reply. We understand not what Translation, or Rubr. you mean.   

That the words (this day) both in the Collects, and Prefaces, be used only upon 
Sect. 4.  the day itself, and for the following days, it be said (as about this time.)   

Reply. And yet there is no certainty, Which was the day itself.   

That a longer time be required for signification of the names of the Com. and 
Sect. 5.  the words of the Rubr. be changed into these (at least some time the day before.)   

Reply. (Sometime the day before) may be, near or at night, which will not allow any leisure at all, to take notice of the proofs of people's scandals or to help them in preparation.   

That the power of keeping scandalous Sinners from the Communion, may be 
Sect 6.  expressed in the Rubr. according to the 26. and 27. Canons, so the Minister be obliged to give an account of the same immediately after to the Ordinary.   

Reply. We were about returning you our very great thanks, for granting us the benefit of the 26. Canon, as that which exceedeth all the rest of your Concessious; But we see you will not make us too much beholden to you: and poor Christians that will not receive the Sacrament contrary to the example of Christ and his Apostles, and the custom of the Catholic primitive Church, and the Canons of general Councils) must be also used as the notorious impenitent sinners. But the Canon requireth us not to signify the cause, but upon complaint, or being required by the ordinary   

That the whole Preface be prefixed to the Commandments. 
Sect. 7.    

Reply. And why not the word (Sabbath day) be put for the (seventh day) in the end. Must not such a falsification be amended?   

That the second Exhortation be read some Sunday, or Holiday, before the 
Sect. 8.  celebration of the Communion, at the discretion of the Minister.  
That the general Confession at the Communion be pronounced by one of the 
Sect. 9  Ministers, the people saying after him, all kneeling humbly upon their knees.  
That the manner of consecrating the Elements, may be made more explicit, 
Sect. 10.  and express; and to that purpose, those words be put into the Rub. [then shall he put his hand upon the Bread, & break it] then shall he put his hand unto the Cup.]  
That if the Font be so placed as the Congregation cannot hear, it may be referred to the Ordinary, to place it more conveniently. 
Sect. 11.   
That those words [yes they do perform them, etc.] nay be altered thus: [because they promise them both, by their Sureties, etc. 
Sect. 12.   
That the words of the last Rubr before the Catechism, may be thus altered, (that children being baptised have all things necessary for their salvation, and 
Sect. 13.  dying before they commit any actual sins, be undoubtedly saved, though they be not Confirmed.]  
That to the Rubr. after Confirmation, these words may be added (Or be ready, and desirous to be Confirmed.] 
Sect. 14.   
That those words (with my body I thee worship) may be altered thus: (with 
Sect. 15.  my body I thee honour.)  
That those words (till death us depart) be thus altered (till death us do part.) 
Sect. 16.   
That the words (sure and certain) may be left out. 
Sect. 17.    

Reply. For all the rest we thank you, but have given our reasons against your sense expressed in Sect. 13. before, and for satisfactoriness of the last: And we must say, in the conclusion, That, if these be all the abatements and amendments you will admit, you sell your innocency, and the Church's peace for nothing.    
FINIS.