A SEASONABLE DISCOURSE AGAINST TOLERATION.

WITH A PREFACE, Wherein the Nature of Persecution in general, and the unjust Complaints of the Dissenting Parties concerning it in particular, are distinctly consi­dered.

LONDON, Printed for Richard Rumbold, in Butcher-hall Lane, near Christ's Church, 1685.

THE PREFACE To the READER.

THough Controversies in Religion are (hypotheti­cally) necessary, (for so long as there is either Ignorance or Malice in the hearts of Men, there will be Differences in Opinion, and Animosities amongst them) yet a prudent well-regulated endeavour to mode­rate and asswage them, is a work truly Christian and Cha­ritable, however it may be fruitless, and unsuccesfull in the end.

I do indeed heartily pray for it, yet dare not (as yet) promise my self so good a return of these my poor La­bours, as my Brethrens conviction; Prejudice and Interest (from which the dearest of Gods Children are not wholly exempted) being not so easily remov'd; The utmost that I can now expect, (and which I hope they will have no cause to deny mee) is their favourable Absolution from that common, yet unworthy Reflection of a Temporizing For­malist; it being my unfeigned Judgment, (after a strict im­partiall inquiry into the nature of such Impositions) that my Subscription to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England is not only warrantable, but necessary.

'Tis not my business at present, to give a particular ex­plication or defence of those Constitutions, which my Dis­senting▪ Brethren (both in Press and Pulpit) have thought fit to oppose; That task hath been with so much Learning [Page 2] (and withall so much Moderation) performed (to omit others) by those two worthy Instruments of Gods glory, Bishop Sanderson, and Mr. Hoeker, that I have often (and I think not without just cause) admired, that any man en­dowed (even) with common Abilities (supposing him of a meek and docile spirit) should remain unsatisfyed, when he shall have but seriously perused the Incomparable writings of those Pious and Learned Persons.

The truth is (be their pretences never so plausible) tis to me very plaine, that many of my Brethren both decline, and dread Conviction; of which (amongst other proofes) this which I now mention is a pregnant Instance.

No sooner had this small Pamphlet appear'd in the World, but (as is usuall in such cases, we being all desi­rous of Novelties) it was generally sought after, and per­used, and (that I may return my Thanks for such encou­raging Reception) not much discommended. However my Dissenting Brethren (from whom I have deserv'd o­ther acknowledgements) were not altogether so obliging; some of which (this is no Conjecture but a certain Truth) though they both knew the Authors Person, and had other endearments, sufficient to have invited a much greater Favour, yet (having barely glanc'd upon the Title) very discourteously (not to say rudely) refus'd, even one single perusall of his humble Petition.

I must confess (though even contrary to my naturall Inclination) I was some little mov'd, to observe such cause­less and irrational Perverseness. For though there be in­deed small Reason, that any man (in this Scribling Age) should so little consult either his Time or Purse, as to think himself oblig'd to the perusall of each impertinent Pam­phlet; yet that so small a Tract, so inoffensively composed, [Page 3] when presented by the hand of a Friend, should not find a more favourable Acceptance, is such an Vngentle-man like thing, that had I the leasure or designe to play the Satyrist, it were no hard task methinks to explode so disingenious an instance.

But of this enough, if not (as some may judge) too much: Which yet is mention'd with this Designe, even to assure my Reader; That be his private Opinion what it will, (if he please to hazard some small portion of Time in the perusall of the following Pamphlet) he shall find nothing to offend him, but the Evidence of Truth, and downe-right Conviction.

I have one thing more to add, and that is an Objection; which being both plausible and common, I shall first Pro­pose, (& that in the Person of some Private weake Christi­an) Secondly R [...]solve with as much clearness as I am able.

The Objection is this.

There are indeed hot Disputes about these Ceremonies, and other Impositions in the Service of God: The Tongues and Pens of Learned men have for a long time been em­ployed about them; the Arguments pro and con, both to de­send and disprove them, are of great weight, and seeming­ly rationall: They are indeed both so plausible, that a Per­son of my rank and Quality (who not only wants the ad­vantage of Education, but is also diverted from such inqui­ries by a particular profession which he is obliged to attend) may very well be perplexed how to behave himself: yet for my own part, I am much inclin'd to think; That these Ceremonies are very dangerous and unlawfull Things▪ and that because I observe so many Learned and Godly Divines, who rather then they will defile themselves with such Pol­lutions, have not only, suffered joyfully the spoyling of their goods, [Page 4] but also Bonds and Imprisonments, Banishments, and a Thousand other Indignities, to which a persecuted people is usually exposed; which certainly such prudent Persons would never have done for a few Ceremonies (the cause of all this mischief) were they such innocent Things, as the Prelats, and their Agents have endeavoured to perswade us.

This is the Objection; To which I Answer as fol­loweth.

That which is said in the first Place of their Learning and piety, is not much to the purpose,

For First, such pretences (being very advantageous to any Cause whatsoever) are far more common then true. The Sic est vulgus; ex veritate pauca, ex opinione multa aesti­mat. Cic. Orat. 1. Vulgar sort (who are chiefly concerned in the Ob­jection) are no competent Judges in these Cases, but much less in the former then the latter. But Secondly, granting them to be as Learned and pious, as their admiring Prose­lytes can fancy, or my Charity could wish them; yet we must remember, that the most Learned and pious are but Men, and therefore do but know in part, and are sanctified in part; and (as the learned Pref. be­fore Serm. Sect. 6. Bp. Sanderson expresseth it) By the power of Godliness in their Hearts are no more se­cured from the possibility of falling into Error through Igno­rance, then from the possibility of falling into Sin through In­firmity; Which should therefore prompt us, (as the sa­fest course) to guide our Actions, not by Example, which (through different Circumstances) is various, and uncer­tain, but by Precept which is sure and fixt; not to have mens Persons in such Admiration, as to embtace their Opi­nions and practises against the Light of Scripture, and Right Reason.

But Thirdly, if Learning and Piety must pass for Argu­ments [Page 5] (which yet they will not, it being no good Conse­quence, such a Learned and Pious Man, or such a learned and pious Company of Men holds this Opinion, therefore 'tis true yet) I say if these must be urg'd for Logick (though Comparisons are harsh, and for the most part odious) I think it might easily appear (without disparagement be it spoken) That there are as Honest, Religious, Zealous good men, that have willingly and chearfully submitted to the Church of England, as the best of them all that have op­pos'd the same.

Our Pious-Fore-fathers (to whom under God, we owe the purity of our Religion, and some of which embrac'd a Stake) had more moderate apprehensions, then the pre­sent Generation.

For, when the Tyranny of the Church of Rome had forc'd them to a Separation (and that in Obedience to God, who commands us neither to believe Lies, nor to commit Sin, neither of which they could avoid by continuing in Commu­nion with her) though they left many of her Ceremonies (the number of them being great and burthensome) yet they thought fit to retain some others of them, and that for Order and Decency in the Service of God.

If it be replyed (as usually it is) That the Reformati­on (being carried on by those that were [...], made of the same Clay, and subject to the like passions with others) was at best but small and imperfect, it being beyond the wit and power of Man, either to foresee, or re­move all Inconveniences on a sudden, and therefore, that it was the Duty of After-Ages, to perfect and complete what they had so happily begun, by removing this Rubbish out of the House of God; To this I Answer,

That the Topick of Reformation, is too large for a short [Page 6] Preface, and beyond my designe; onely this by the by; I wish that Protestants (of whatsoever Perswasion) would be more sparing in their Reflections upon our first Refor­mers; for besides the advantage that is hereby given to the Romish Party, we ought to consider, That abuses are easier complain'd of, then redress'd; and possibly, had the men of this Age been in their stead, and under the same Circum­stances, I do much question (if we may take an estimate by their late transactions) whether they would have brought the work to so good an Issue, as through Gods Blessing they then did. But no more of this.

Tis sufficient for my present purpose; That since the cause of their Separation from Rome, was to avoid her Pol­lutions, 'tis evident; That these Ceremonies which they thought fit to retaine, were (in their Judgment) no part of them, or any other way unlawful; the which, if my dis­senting Brethren will but grant, (not to talke now off their inexpedience, of which, neither they nor I must be Judges) as it is a fair step to end our Differences, so it hence avoid­ably follows, That if some pious men have refus'd the Ceremonies, others of as great piety have Conform'd to them; if some Learned have disputed, others as Learned have defended, which may for ever Silence that Branch of the Objection, viz. The Learning and Piety of their Parties.

Nor is there much more weight in that other part of the Objection, (drawn from their persecutions and sufferings) which comes now to be considered.

A Pretence indeed very plausible and popular; for besides its subtle Insinuations upon a natural score, (we being all obliged by that common bond of Humanity, to compassio­nate those that are in any misery and trouble, witness those usual resentments even for a Thief upon the Gal­lows) [Page 7] it hath this farther advantage; That wherever in Scripture the word Persecution is mentioned, and that either with some Promise annex'd for the support of Gods people (who otherwise might despond under such gloomy dis­pensations) or of some Judgment denounced, to restrain the fury of their Persecutors: I say, wheresoever such pas­sages occur (as they do frequently in holy Writ) they have learned the Art (by imposing upon a credulous Vulgar) to make the World believe, that they are those persecuted Saints, for whom those promises are recorded, and that all such persons as are any way employed (though in Obe­dience to Authority) to suppress them, are Persecuting wretches, on whom, sooner or later, all those Judgments threatned shall certainly be inflicted.

I shall not in the least offend them with any harsh Inve­ctives (such Reflections (though some ease indeed to a bur­then'd mind) being very little to the Substance of a Cause) but shall only beg their Patience and Charity, whilst I en­deavour to undeceive them, by assuring them in plaine English (what, without Repentance, they will one day find true) That they are not Persecuted as Saints, but punished as Malefactors.

And this I shall (through Gods assistance) undenyably prove in this Method.

1. By fixing the Notion, in laying down a clear and di­stinct definition of Persecution.

2. By considering, how far those present Sufferings to which our Nonconformists are obnoxious, do agree with it, or differ from it.

Persecution for Religion (for of such onely I now treat) may not unfitly be thus described.

Tis an eager violent inflicting, of outward temporal Evils, for the exercise of true Religion.

I call it eager violent inflicting) so the Lat. i. e. con­tinue, seu con­tinuato motu sequor. inimi­co affectu in­sequor. con­tinuò, assidue quaero Mart. Lex. Philo­log. Persequor, and the Gr. i. e. [...]. Hesy­chius. [...] do fully denote; they both signifie so to follow, as a Hunter doth his Prey, who pursues it till he takes it.

But because these terms eager and violent, do only agree to one sort of Persecution, viz. That which is furious and rageing, (it being sometimes more mild and moderate) and since definitions do express the nature, but not the degree of the thing defined (as when we define Calor, we take no notice of it in summo) I shall therefore omit these words eager and violent, and then the definition (I suppose un­questionably) stands thus,

Persecution is an inflicting of outward temporal Evils, for the exercise of true Religion.

Outward temporal Evils) either upon the Body, as Ba­nishment, Imprisonment, Tortures, Death; or upon the Estate, as Pecuniary Mulcts, confiscation of Goods; or upon Reputation and good Name, as Slanderings, Revilings, Reproachful Speeches.

For the exercise of true Religion) which is the Ratio for­malis, the Constitutive difference, whereby Persecution is distinguished from all other violences whatsoever. For let the greatest Reproaches and Indignities, usher in the most exquisite Tortures, and those be concluded by a Death as cruel, as the utmost Malice on Earth, or Fury in H [...]ll can contrive; yet unless these Tortures be eo nomine inflicted, for the sake and cause of Religion, we may call them merciless, inhumane, unnatural Cruelties, (or any such like name as can most fitly express them) but not Perse­cution.

By Religion, (that I may yet more fully explaine the Definition) I mean the Worship of God; by true Religion, [Page 9] the worshipping of him according to his Will; the which Will (though heretofore variously delivered, and in diffe­rent Dispensations, yet those extraordinary ways of Con­veyance being now ceased) it hath pleased the Goodness and Wisdom of God to deliver in Writing (by the Mini­stry of the Prophets and Apostles) in those Books which (by way of eminency) we call the Scriptures. So that whatever Worship is not according to those holy Oracles, is not true and acceptable, but false and vain: In vain do ye Worship me, &c. It being an undoubted Truth; That God hath as much right to appoint the way of his own Wor­ship, as to be Worshipp'd.

There are moreover, we know, two parts of Religion; Credenda, Agenda, Truths to be believed, and Duties to be performed, in order to Salvation; and in both these, the Scripture is our Rule and Direction.

He therefore that is Punished, either for believing those Truths, or for doing those Duties, the belief and perfor­mance of which holy Scripture requireth of him; or he that is punished, for not believing those things as Truths, which are but falsities and lies, or for not doing those things as Duties, which are sinful and unlawful, he, I say, who is punished upon these accounts, is properly Persecuted.

The Case then about Persecution, as it respects the Non­conformists, is briefly this:

If those Instances, for which they are punished, be no way required of them in holy Scripture, either for belief, or practise; and if it shall appear, upon inquiry, that the Church of England requires nothing of them, that is in side Erroneous, or in facto Impious; if she neither enjoynes them to believe Lies, nor to commit any Sin, if nor so, nor so, let the world then judge where the fault lies; and [Page 10] who they are, that (without Repentance) must one day Answer (which I fear is now little thought on) for all those Separations and Divisions in the Church, all those Distra­ctions, Confusions, Wars, Murthers, Rapines, &c. (the na­tural consequents of the former) in the State, which these poor miserable divided Kingdomes have so sadly ex­perienc'd.

'Twill be replyed, (and I find it no unusual Plea) That Preaching and Praying are necessary Duties, But they are punished for Preaching and Praying, Therefore they are puni­shed for performance of religious Duties, and consequently (ac­cording to the now mentioned definition) are Persecuted.

They tell us, Prop. for Saf. of King and Kingd. p. 10. There are certain inoffencive persons, and they (meaning their Rulers) have really no more against them, only that they meet, and preach, and pray together. Innocent folks, who are dragged to Prison, for doing nothing in earnest, but endeavouring to save their Souls.

That I may, if possible, convince my Brethren, of the weakness and vanity of this plausible Argument, I'le give them my Answer (I hope Methodically and clearly) in these following Conclusions.

Concl: 1.

By Preaching and Praying, (as they are the Subject of our present Disquisition) is meant the performance of them in publick, not in private; this latter being liberae observation is, since every man (of what perswasion soever) may not only Pray with his own family, when and how he pleaseth, but also Preach, or Instruct them (and that without fear of punishment) in what manner he thinks fit.

Concl: 2.

In Preaching and Praying there is considerable, Substan­tia & Circumstantiae, Res & Modus, the substance of the [Page 11] Duty, or the thing to be perform'd, and the circumstances, or manner of its performance.

Preaching and Praying, quoad Substantiam, are necessary, necessitate Praecepti & Medii, i. e. God hath Commanded, and the condition of the Church (whilst Militant & in viâ) doth require, that these Duties be attended.

Nor is the Substance only, but also the Circumstances of these Duties in Thesi, and in the general necessary, i. e. when these Duties are considered in actu exercito, when­ever they are put into practice, we must necessarily make use of Circumstances, some or other.

Concl: 3.

These Circumstances (however in Thesi necessary) in Hy­pothesi and in Particular, are not determined in Scripture; (which, I do not mean as to their Lawfulness, but as to their being duties) if they be, there must then be produc'd some clear and distinct Precept (perpetually obligatory to the Church) requiring our observance of such or such Cir­cumstances; for this, and nothing else, (though other things are pretended) can constitute a Religious Duty. Thus, though Prayer be a Duty, yet whether it be a Set Form, or Extemporary? The Minister, whether habited in a Surplice, or without? His Gesture, whether kneeling, or standing? The Place, whether in a Deske, or at the Communion Table, or at both? So for Preaching, whe­ther in a Gown, a long Cloak or a short? How many Sermons in one day, whether three, or two, or but one; I say, none of these, or such like, are determined in Scrip­ture to be our Duties; those who assert they are, must produce the Command making them to be such; for Duty and Command, have a necessary Respect and Relation to one another.

Concl: 4.

These Circumstances (though still free and indifferent quoad naturam, being neither commanded nor forbidden yet) must not be left undetermined quoad usum; i. e. Private persons must not be left at liberty, to do what they think fit in Circumstantials, as if an agreement in Substantialls only were sufficient; so as if there be but Preaching and Praying; if these Duties be but performed, one man may use a Set Form, another may pray Extempore; this Mini­ster may wear the Surplice, whilst his Neighbour rejects it as Popish and Antichristian. Does not any man (who hath not enslaved his Reason, to support a Faction▪ very easily observe, that the bare mention of this Fancy (such I am forc'd to call it) is its own Confutation? was it ever so much as thought on, but in the heat of a Dispute? Did ever any Constituted Church in the world allow such Li­berty? Are not my Brethren themselves convinc'd of the contrary? If they deny it, I could very easily refresh their Memories in so obvious a Theam; I could turn them to their Directory, and their Ordinances to enforce it, &c. but I spare them. In short,

Mr. New­comes Serm. at Pauls, Feb. 8. 1646. pag. 18. There is scarce any difference so small, and inconsiderable, but the divulging, and propagating of it, may prove dangerous and pernicious, and in the event intollerable: Therefore to allow private persons the Liberty, to order these Cir­cumstances in the publick Worship (pro modulo Conscientiae) as their own Conscience (perhaps humour or interest) shall Dictate, is the ready way to destroy all Order and Government in the world. And this I hope is sufficiently made plain (to any man that will but read and consider) in the following Collections.

Well then, to rise yet a little higher.

Since it is necessary that there must be some Circum­stances made use of in the exercise of these Duties, Preach­ing and Praying, (it being impossible to perform any Action (and therefore Religious Action) without them) and since Scripture hath determined nothing, either by requiring some as necessary, or forbidding others as unlawful: and since to leave them undetermin'd (for private Persons to do what seems good in their own eyes) is apparently destructive both to Church and State; what can more na­turally follow then this. That they must be Determined by the Supream Magistrate; who by the Advice of his Ec­clesiastical Council, his Convocation, (as in Seculars by his Parliament) may appoint the performance of these, and other Religious Duties in such a manner, as is most agre­able to that Apostolical Canon: Let all things be done de­cently and in order. I proceed therefore to my fifth Con­clusion, which is this,

Concl: 5.

The Supream Magistrate must determine what Circum­stances shall be used in the Worship and Service of God. The which Conclusion, I shall rather suppose then prove; not that I think it of less truth or certainty then the rest, but because our Divines, not only Episcopal, but also the dissenting Parties (with whom I am now treating) have perform'd it with so much plainness and satisfaction to my hand.

And though I might collect whole Volumes from their Sermons, and other Treatises, to confirme this Truth, yet to relieve my self from the drudgery of transcribing, (wich is no pleasing task) and to give ease to my Reader, I shall only refer him to some Places in the following Collections; which if he please to turn to, and read (as they are cited [Page 14] in the See the Pages fol­lowing, viz. p. 18. 19, 20, 21. 28. 29. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 50. Margin) before he goes any farther, he will do me great right, and himself no displeasure.

From which Places it evidently appears, That the Ma­gistrate is both Custos and Vindex utrius (que) Tabulae. That the Examples of the Kings of Israel and Judah, may suffici­ently warrant and encourage all Religious Magistrates, to reform and settle Religion in one Vniform way, and take care that all under their Government, should all serve the Lord with one shoulder, this being not a Tyranny over men, but the Privi­ledge of the Gospell. That they must take a course, that Chri­stians may live a quiet and Peaceable life in Godliness and ho­nesty, not in Strife and Contention; which how they shall be able to perform, if every man (concerning these Cir­cumstances) may hold what be please, and Publish and Preach what he holds, I am not able to imagine. These and many the like Passages (some of which I have now given you in their own words) you will find in the forecited places; from whence I think it is plain, ut supra pag. 20. That where the Do­ctrine and Discipline of the Church doth not, or cannot pre­vail, the Magistrate must interpose his Coercive Power, for Restraint or Remedy. Which leads me to the sixt Concl.

Concl. 6.

There must be Eccl: Laws, Canons, or Constitutions made, for the due ordering of these Circumstances.

Much I grant hath been objected by my dissenting B [...]: against these Constitutions, both in Thesi (against all Eccl: Laws in generall) and in Hypothesi (against these of our own Church in particular.)

As to the first (for the latter is beyond my designe) I think it would puzzle the most judicious Dissenter, to give a solid satisfactory Account, why the Supream Power may make Laws to determine Indifferent Circumstances in [Page 15] Temporalls, and not in Spiritualls; they being both liable (in my apprehension) to the same Difficulties and Incon­veniences, and if the latter be exploded, the former (sup­posing they are faithfull to their Principles) will very hard­ly be defended.

Concl: 7.

These Eccl: Laws when rightly made and constituted, are obligatory, and must be obey'd. The Reason is, Because Obe­dience to Lawfull Authority inlicitis & honestis, is a duty, which God in his holy Word requireth of us. Now that is lawfull, and consequently the debita materia of any hu­mane Constitution (Ecclesiastical or Civil) which is not contrary to any former obligation. Unless therefore the matter of these Constitutions, or the thing which they require us to perform, can be evinc'd (by good Logical Deduction) to be contrary to Gods will Revealed in Scri­pture, there remains nothing but Obedience, not onely Passive, chearfully and quietly (without murmurings and revilings) submitting to the Punishment; but also Active, by a ready performance of the thing commanded; though possibly it might be thought very inconvenient, as being contrary to Education, Custome, Interest & Advantage in the World, and the like. And therefore,

Concl: 8.

We being not (even the best of us all) over-ready in this great Duty of Obedience, There are Penalties annexed to these Eccl. Const. (as well as to other Laws) to frighten us into our Duty. Such is the corruption and stubborness of our natures, and so little are we affected with the Obligations of Conscience, that it is morally impossible for the most wholesome Laws to obtain their End, without the Ad­dition of Civil Sanctions to enforce them. For, if the Laws [Page 16] of God, which are holy, just and good, and every way perfect, (they being the contrivance of infinite Wisdome and Goodness) if these are contemned and neglected, and (and as sad experience proves, it) dayly cast behind our backs, when the observance of them is inconsistent with some Bruitish Pleasure; no wonder if the Laws of Men, (who not onely (many times) want Wisdome to contrive, but also Goodness to designe what is most profitable for their People) I say, no wonder if these be rather quarrel'd with and disputed, then submitted to and obey'd.

As therefore the infinite Majesty of Heaven, hath enfor­ced the observance of his Commands, by a suitable pro­posal of Rewards and Punishments; so it is the Duty of Inferior Legislators, to be a Punishment to evil doers, and a Praise to them that do well. Therefore,

Concl: 9.

The Supream Magistrate, in inflicting these Penalties, i. e. in punishing the Offenders against his Constitutions, doth execute Justice, and perform his Duty.

The end and design of Government, is Salus Publica, it is to take care, ne quid detrimenti capiat Communitas, or in the Apostles Phrase, That we may live a quiet and peaceable life, in all godliness and honesty. This is the End.

And since no End can be attain'd, but by a due and effectual Application of proper Means, we cannot but in Reason grant, that the Magistrate may employ such Me­dium's as are most conducive to his desired End. Amongst which, this certainly is not the least considerable, (and without which, all Government is but precarious) viz. A removal of whatsoever is hurtful and destructive to his Society.

Now since the Publick allowance, of different Opinions, [Page 17] and Practices about Circumstantials in Religion (particu­larly about Preaching ad Praying) doth naturally improve into contentious Disputes, and those Disputes (if not re­straind) break out into Civill Wars; for Mr. New­comens Ser. before Parl. Sep. 12. 1644. pag. 36. Men will at last take up Swords and Spears instead of Pens; and defend by Armes what they cannot do by Arguments. Since things are thus, Tis at least Prudence (if not Duty) in the Supream Power, to remove the Occasion of this Ruine, by enjoyn­ing the Publick Practice of these Duties in one Vniforme way; That all his Subjects may speake the same thing; and that there be no Divisions amongst them, perfectly joynd toge­ther in the same mind, and in the same judgement.

If therefore upon inquiry it do appeare, That the Ma­gistrate hath Power to make Constitutions, for the better ordering of those Circumstances, about which Scripture hath determind nothing, whether wee must use or not use them; and if Offenders against these Constitutions are justly punishable, it undenyably follows; that in punishing such Violaters of his Laws, the Magistrate doth not Persecute, but execute Justice, and that those Persons who are thus reflected upon, are not Persecuted as Saints, but Punishd as Malefactors. The very Case of our Nonconformists here in England.

The Summary of these Conclusions (that my Reader may the better apprehend them to be both Consequent and Evi­dent) is this.

Preaching and Praying are necessary Duties, Which cannot be performd without Circumstances, These are not determind in Scripture, Nor must be left undetermind, Therefore by the Supream Magistrate, Who to effect this makes Laws and Con­stitutions, These have Penalties annexd to be inflicted on the Disobedient, The infliction of these Penalties is the execution [Page 18] of Justice, and the Magistrates Duty, But no Persecution, Therefore those Persons that suffer these Penalties are not in­juriousely Persecuted but justly Punish'd.

Quod erat Demonstrandum.

I cannot at all doubt, but the weakness of my Brethrens Argument (to any unprejudic'd Reader) begins now to appear. However, I will repeat their Syllogisme once more, and then let the World judge who is in the Right.

Preaching and Praying are necessary Duties,
But N. C. are punish'd for Preaching and Praying,

Therefore

They are Punish'd for necessary Duties,
and consequently are Persecuted.

I Answer, first, by distinguishing the Major.

Preaching and Praying quoad Substantiam, are necessary Duties, i. e. Its necessary that these Duties be perform'd. Quoad Circumstantias, they are not necessary, i. e. though these Duties be perform'd, yet it is not necessary to perform them in such or such a manner. Thus, though Prayer be ne­cessary, yet that it should be Extemporary, or without a Form, is not necessary, or that the Minister should be without a Surplice, is not necessary.

So for Preaching, though it be a Duty, yet to preach or hear a Sermon in a Conventicle of two or three Thou­sand, or to expose my self to Sufferings, and perhaps, a long Imprisonment, to the neglect of my Profession, and thence the ruine of my Family, for which I am bound to provide▪ I say, to throw my self upon all these Incon­veniencies, only to hear a Sermon from A. B. or C. D. when I may safely hear a much better from an Orthodox Minister, is so far from being necessary, that it may justly [...] Who hath required these things at your hands. That

Secondly, I Answer, by denying the Minor, which is utterly false and untrue. They are not punished for Preach­ing and Praying (they being punishable for their neglect) but they are punished for not observing those Circumstances about Preaching and Praying, which Authority requireth of them; or, they are punished for not performing these Duties in such a manner as their Governours require; or more plainly yet, they are punished for not observing, and submitting to those Constitutions, which their Governours have Established, for the better ordering of these Duties. The Obligation of which Constitutions (because they are much oppos'd) I'le endeavour to confirm by this one Con­sideration. Bonum non oritur nisi ex integrâ Causâ, There must be a concurrence of all requisite Conditions to make a thing good. Now the Conditions required to the Vali­dity of a Law, are not unduely exprest by the four Causes; Efficient, Material, Formal, Final; and, That Law which is not Defective in any one of these, is Valid and Obliga­tory, But such are the Constitutions of the Church of En­gland. Therefore. &c.

1. Respectu Causae Efficientis, there is sufficient Autho­rity and Legislative Power. 2. Respectu Materiae, the things enjoyn'd are not unlawful, as being contrary to any Law, any former Obligation. 3. Respectu Formae, there is sufficient Promulgation. 4. Respectu Finis, Publick Peace and Safety, (by restraining Disorders, Tumults, Contentions, which might arise from Difformity in Wor­ship) is the very Reason and End of their being exacted.

Object. But is not Conscience violated, and Christian­liberty infringed by these Ecclesiastical Constitutions, since they determine us precisely ad unum in the use of Indifferent things, which God and Christ have left free ad utrumlibet?

Answ. I Answer, (referring my Reader for farther Sa­tisfaction to Bishop Sandersons seventh Sermon ad Pop. pag. 384.) That there is no Subject of England (whatever is pretended to the contrary) but hath the Liberty of his Conscience; or, (to speak more intelligibly) may worship God according to his Conscience, i. e. in such a way and manner as his Conscience (his judging Faculty) judgeth most acceptable; provided always, that he keep his opi­nions to himself, or to his Family, and make them a Rule only for his own private Practice: But if such a man will go publish his Opinions, and entangle the Consciences of others, and seek to draw Disciples after him, and make a Party, and cause Divisions and Dissentions amongst his Majesties Subjects, and trouble the Publick, he is to be restrain'd, he is not to be tolerated.

Object. Mr. Calamys Ser. before the Lords. Dec. 25. 1644. pag. 38. Will you allow the Magistrate to Tyranize over mens Consciences?

Answ. By no means; But I believe it is the Duty of ‘Magistrates to keep men from infecting their Subjects with Soul-destroying Errours. If thou hast an Hereti­cal Opinion, have it to thy self, and the Magistrate will not, nay, cannot meddle with thy private Conscience. But if thou labourest to infect others, with thy Grace­destroying Opinions, I doubt not but the Magistrate is bound to keep thee from spreading thy Infection to the undoing of the Souls of his Subjects. If he may law­fully shut up a man that hath the Plague upon his body, that he may not Infect others; why not a man that hath the Plague of Heresie upon his Soul, that so he may not destroy the Souls of Thousands? Shall a Master in a Family have power to put away a Servant that is tainted with a grosse Opinion, and yet not be called a Tyrant [Page 21] over that Servants Conscience? And shall not the chief Magistrate of a Kingdome have Power to put out of his Kingdome (at least to shut up from doing hurt) one that is his Subject, and polluted with Blasphemous, Hereti­cal, Idololatrical Opinions? Is not the Kingdom the Magistrates House and Family?’

‘These are the means that are to be used to cure the distractions of England. The Lord give us grace to put them in practice.’

But this and the other party will reply, That they are neither Heretical nor Turbulent; and therefore what is all this discourse to them.

I Answer, No man must be Judge in his own Cause; every man therefore is to be supposed such, that (when his Place requires it) refuseth (by publick Oaths, Sub­scriptions, and Declarations) to give the Magistrate assu­rance, that he is Orthodox and Peaceable.

Mr. New­comen: Serm. at Pauls Feb. 8. 1646. p. 40. ‘Possibly they will all say, They are of the same Opinion with the Reformed Churches in Fundamentals, as well as we, and their differences are but in minutio­ribus. Now supposing this to be true (as it may be in some of them) why do they then transgress the Apo­stles Rule? why do they not if it be in matters of lesser moment wherein they differ from us, why do not they keep their Opinions private, and have their Faith unto themselves before God? why do they upon so small Differences (if the Differences be so small) withdraw from Communion with us, and the rest of the Chur­ches, and gather themselves into distinct and separate Churches?’

Ʋt supra p. 21. ‘Had all that Profess the Gospel in England, made Conscience to be of the same mind, and the same Judg­ment [Page 22] with their Brethren, and the rest of the Churches of Christ, as far as possibly; and where they cannot, where there is a necessity of differing, had they made Conscience to keep their Differences from appearing in Publick; to have their private Opinions and Faith to themselves, and not intangle the weak with their doubt­ful Disputations; forbearing to judge or despise those that are not of their Opinion, loving them still as Bre­thren, not censuring them as Prophane, Antichristian, Fighters against God, men that will wilfully shut their eyes against the Light; had these things (I say) been attended to on all hands, our Breaches had never been so great as now they are, nor should the lovers of Truth and Peace have had so much cause to lament them.’

‘But, Mr. Baxters Cure of Church divisions, pag. 254. O the deceitfulness of the heart of man! Little do many real Separists, who cry out against the spirit of Persecution, suspect that the same spirit is in them! whence is Persecution, but from thinking ill of others, and abhorring them, or not loving them. And do not you do so by those whom you causelesly separate from? Mr. Newco­men ut supra p. 40. Who are they that brand their Brethren with the Ti­tle Proud, Time-servers, Prelatical, Tyrannical, Antichri­stian? And what is this less then Persecution?’

Rom. 2. 1. ‘Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for in that thou judgest another, thou condemnest thy self, for thou that judgest dost the same things. Matth. 7. 3. 4. 5. And why beholdest thou the More that is in thy Brothers eye, but considerest not the Beam that is in thine own eye? Or how wilt thou say to thy Bro­ther, let me pull out the Mote out of thine eye; and behold, a Beam is in thine own eye? Thou Hypocrite, first cast out the Beam out of thine own eye, and then [Page 23] shalt thou see clearly to cast out the Moat out of thy Brothers eye.’

I have a fair occasion (could I allow my self the liber­ty of its improvement) to return my Brethrens Argument upon their own heads, by assuring them (and I beseech God to give them grace to consider and bewaile it) that the Persecution (so much complained of) lyes at their own Doors, they being not innocent Sufferers, but injuri­ous Aggressors.

These I know are very harsh and unpleasing words; but the Truth of them will appear, when we shall have re­membred, that there are more sorts of Persecution then one, of which St. Lib. de Ʋ ­nit. Eccles. contr. Peril: Epist. cap. 17. Augustine thus informes. Gravius per­sequitur filius Patrem male vivendo, quam Pater filium casti­gando. Et gravius ancilla Saram persecuta est per iniquam Superbiam, quam eam Sara per debitam Disciplinam. Et gravius Dominum persequebantur propter quos dictum est, ze­lus domus tuae comedit me, quam eos ipse cum eorum mensas e­vertit, & eos flagello de templo expulit. There is you see Persecution of the Tongue, and of an irregular Life, as well as of the Hand; and if my Brethren are not at present guilty of this latter (whether through restraint, or their own good nature I shall not determine) I am sure the former is their constant Practice.

For, (to insist only upon that) 'tis even amazeing to mention, what bitter Taunts, rude Sarcasmes, unmannerly Jeers, fabulous Stories, scandalous Reproaches, are their daily exercise, whereby they vex the Righteous Souls, wea­ken the Hands, discourage the Endeavours, of their honest Orthodox Conforming Brethren, Are not all Places, all Companies, all Occasions sufficient witnesses of this Truth?

Really 'tis very sad, (and to be lamented with Tear) [Page 24] That the great work of Religion, the Preaching of the Go­spell, and the Salvation of Souls, should be thus obstru­cted by these unfortunate practises.

But I hope no faithfull Son of the Church will be discou­rag'd at these Things, or in the least neglect his Duty, though all the World should be offended at him. The Rule is fixt. We must obey God rather them Man. 'Tis our Dear Lords case, in whom there was no Sin, neither was Guile found in his mouth, and yet he was accus'd for a Wine bibber, a Glutton, and that he had a Devill. Math. 10. 24. &c. The Disciple is not above his Master, nor the Servant above his Lord. It is enough for the Disciple that he be as his Master, and the Servant as his Lord: if they have call'd the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his Houshold? Fear them not therefore: Fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the Soul; but rather fear him which is able to destroy both Soul and Body in Hell.

I cannot now stay to expostulate with my Brethren, otherwise I should tell them, there is such a thing as Scandal; and that Christ hath little ones, the meanest of whom, if they offend (hinder from their Duty, and stop them in their way to Heaven, by speaking Evil of the Ways of God) it were better a Milstone were hanged about their necks, and they cast into the midst of the Sea.

But I shall only desire them to consider that of Saint James; If any man among you seem to be Religious, and u James 1. 26. bridleth not his Tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this mans Religion is vain.

Mr. Baxter ut supra p. 245. ‘And yet how contrary is the practise of no small number of the Religious? In all Companies, how for­ward are they to talke of the sins of Princes and Par­liaments? of Courtiers, of Nobility and Gentry, espe­cially [Page 25] of Ministers? And not onely of the scanda­lous, that are guilty indeed, but of the Innocent, that are not of their way, whose faults they rather [...]. make than find.’

I have done; and must intreat the Readers Charity, in pardoning those excesses of my Pen, which (whilst I was intent upon the matter) may possibly have fall'n from mee. God he knows it, (and tis my comfort when the world condemnes mee) I have no designe to exasperate any man but to reforme him. If this do not satisfy (for some men are very hard to please) take this farther Apology in the words of that Reverend Person now mentiond, whose Piety and Moderation I wish his Brethren would imitate.

Mr. Baxter ut supra. p. 251. & 253. ‘Woe to the Land and People that can multiply Sin and cannot Repent; And woe to them that pretend Repentance, and love to be flatter'd in their Sin, and cannot endure to be admonish'd, but take all the disco­verys of their Sin to be injurious reproach. Among the Prophane wee take this to bee a deadly sign of Im­penitency. And is it so bad in them, and good in us? It is part of my Office to cry with holy Bradford RE­PENT O ENGLAND; and to say after Christ (Except ye Repent, ye shall all likewise Perish,) And can I call men to Repent, when I must not dare to tell them of what? nor to mention the Sin which is most to be repented of? I use all this Preface because I know that Guilt and Impenitency are touchy, and tender, and galled, and querulous, and such will bestow the time in backbiting their Monitor, which they should bestow in lamenting their sin. But shall I therefore for­bear, and betray their Souls, and betray the Land [Page 26] through cowardly Silence? Must I shew that I hate Professours by not admonishing them, (Lev. 19. 17.) when I must shew that I love the looser sort by my sharp reproofs? Must I not fear them that can kill the Body? and must I fear to displease a professed Chri­stian, calling him to repentance in a time of Judge­ments?’

‘Read on now with these Memento's in your eye: And if after so plain a Premonition, you will venture to charge mee with that which I disclaime, do it at your own perill. I stand or fall to the Judgement of God, and look for a better reward then the Hypocrites, which is, To have the good Opinion of men, be they Professours of Piety, or Profane. And with me by Gods grace, it shall hereafter be accounted a small Thing (to the hindering of my Fidelity to Christ and mens souls) to be judged of men, 1 Cor. 4. 3.’

‘And if there should be any Pastors of the Chur­ches, who instead of concurring to heal the Flocks of these dividing Principles, shall rather joyne with Backbiters, and encourage them in their misreports and slanders, because it tendeth to the supposed interest of their Party or themselves, let them prepare to an­swer such unfaithfulness to their Consciences which will shortly be awakned, and to the great Shepherd of the Flock who is at the door, and who told even the De­vills Agents, that a House or Kingdom divided against it self cannot stand, but is brought to nought. Matt. 12. (If alas, alas, experience hath not yet, not yet, not yet, done enough to teach them this.)’

TOLERATION Disapprov'd and Condemn'd &c.
Humbly presented to the serious Consideration of all Dissenting Parties.

My Brethren,

THE Lord Jesus (who knows all our Hearts, and before whose great Tribu­nal both you and and I must one day ap­peare) is my witness; that the cheif designe of my present undertaking, is the Peace and welfare of the Church; the continuance of the Gospel; and the eternal Salvation of pretious and immortal Souls. I do therefore much hope (though we are all naturally impatient of opposition) that you will favourably receive, and seriously consi­der these plaine (yet well meaning) lines; which have no other patronage, then the charity of the Author, and the candor and piety of those persons to whom they are directed.

The solemnity of this Preface as it may raise your expectations, so it may possibly invite your [Page 2] riosity to inquire; who, or what manner of person I am, that have taken the confidence of so impor­tant an Address.

And though the knowledge of my name would signifie little, (I being not so considerable as that it should add any weight to my perfor­mance) yet that I may in some sort gratify such obliging Readers (as I hope to find you) I shall farther acquaint you; that (though I am not a per­son very ambitious to be known yet) upon oc­casion, I shall either publickly own, and vindicate, or (if duely convinc'd) as publickly recant my pre­sent opinion; and (in short) to secure you, and A­pologize for my selfe, (since concealed names are ever suspitious) I do solemnly protest: that I am no scoffer at Religion, nor railer at true Pie­ty; that I love an honest religious good man (that endeavours to save his soul, and come to hea­ven) under what profession soever I find him: that I will pitty, and (according to my poor a­bility) rectify, but never make sport with his er­rours, and mistakes: and herein I doe readily sub­scribe to the learned L Advertise­ments touch­ing the Church of England, in his Refuse. [...]. 165. Verulam, That to turne Religion into a Comedy or Satyr, to search, and rip up wounds with a laughing countenance; to intermix [Page 3] Scripture & scurrility sometimes in one sentence, is a thing very far from the devout reverence of a christian, and scant beseeming the honest regard of a sober man. Two principal causes (saith this honourable person) have I ever known of Atheisme; curious Controver­sies, and prophane scoffing. And no less do I admire (what I hope you will grant I have endeavoured to transcribe) that incomparable saying of the ju­dicious The Pre­face to hi [...] Eccl: Pol Sect. 2. Hooker. There will come a time when three words uttered with Charity and meekness, shall re­ceive a far more blessed Reward, then three thousand volumns written with disdainful sharpness of Wit. But, if an irregular heat (which I will yet endea­vour to suppress) should some little display it selfe; (it▪ being very difficult to contend coldly, and without Affection, about things which we hold dear and pretious) and certainly the Peace of the Church is eminently such) if Passion, and Interest, should obtrude themselves under the no­tion of Zeale (which God knows, is no less common then fatal mistake in the management of our Controversies) I do then humbly beg of you, that you would seriously consider the following Words of the fore-cited good man; that, the man­ner of mens writings must not alienate our hearts from [Page 4] the Truth, if it appear they have the Truth.

Having now [as far as 'tis judged convenient) given you an account of the Author, t'will in all likeli­hood be next demanded (since this Subject hath been of late so fully, and as some think unanswe­rably discust) what convincing Reasons I have to trouble, either my Brethren to read, or my self to write, so common, and (whilest proposalls are on foot) so unwelcome a discourse.

Really (my Brethren) did I nor fear, that such frequent protestations might seem too affected; or that Conscience and Reality, might be mistaken for humour and designe; I would once more call the searcher of all Hearts to witness; that I am so far from a persecuting spirit (the usuall brand we bestow upon our Adversaries) that some Months since I had so favourable an opinion of Indulgence, Connivence, or Toleration, that I lit­tle thought I should now appear an obstructer of so much desir'd, and (as I then apprehended) so blessed a work.

I am confident you are very forward to know the Reason of so sudden, and unexpected a change; tis therefore (omitting all farther pre­facing) in short thus.

Being desirous to informe my selfe in the Na­ture and extent of Toleration, which I observ'd (in such variety of methods, by such different Par­ties) so zealously promoted; (and that under no less titles then Liberty of conscience; the great Interest of all Kingdomes, and States, and par­ticularly of England) in order to a more full satisfaction (not omitting my hearty Prayers to the Father of Lights, from whom cometh every good and perfect gift, and who hath promised to give Wisdome, Counsel, and direction to him that asketh) I procur'd, and perus'd, some of the most considerable Tracts and Pamphlets (pro and con) that have handled this Subject: and I must inge­niously confess (though I was not perfectly con­vinc'd yet) I did at first very much favour (whom I do yet no less pitty) the dissenting Par­ty: and really it seem'd so plausible (since every man must answer for his own works) that every man should have the Liberty of his own opinion; and the name of Conscience is so sacred; that I durst not but make a pause, before I had pass'd a judgement upon such honest pretences. And (to make you my Confessors) I was no little affected with some resentments of a late ingeni­ous [Page 6] Writer; his words are these.

There are a company of People about us in the c Propos: for the safety of King and Kingdome. Pag. 10. Country of different perswasions, who meet some­times many hundreds together, that our Justices have been in perplexity what to do. The most of them (for ought I perceive] are certainly inoffensive persons, and they have really no more against them, then Pli­ny against the Christians of old, when he sent to Tra­jan about them, that is, only that they meet, and Preach and Pray together: and if that excellent Prince was ashamed after this report he gave him, of them in his Epistle, to have those good men sought out any more unto punishment, I cannot but favour their inclinations, which are a verse from the like In­quisition. I professe to God it is such an ungentleman like thing (me thinks) to trouble ones Neighbours, that I should be glad to rid modest men of that worke. It were better all these Acts suffered at once a due and Christian regulation, than we should be still put upon, this untoward dragging innocent Folk's thus to Prison for doing nothing in earnest, but endeavouring to save their souls. In the name of God take you your Psal­ter, and let them say their Prayers as they will.

This, together with some other reflections drawne from the great Love of Christ to us [Page 7] (which therefore by way of gratitude wee are to acknowledge by suitable Acts of love, pity, and indulgence to our poore Brethren) did very much move me; The words of my Author are these.

There is a person I hope you would do a kindnesse P. 72. for with all your heart, and you have Reason, it is for your dear Lord that bought you, and there is no­thing in the world you can do (I am perswaded) that he will take so kindly from you at this time, as to be pitiful to his Servants, who are distressed about your Acts in point of Conscience, and who the more despi­sed they are, and like unto their Lord, the fitter Sub­jects they are for your compassion. And a little after—If you had no need of mercy from God, it were tolera­ble then for you to be extreame towards others.

I hope this candid confession of my weak­nesse (if yet it be a weakenesse to acknow­ledge my errours) shall not so far prejudice my Reader, as to hinder his acceptance of my fol­lowing Reasons, if it appear that they are really such (i. e.) rational and convincing. To giue you therefore my Thoughts in order, my first refle­ction was this;

That though this Toleration, whilst considered in the notion, and as it were in the Idea, do carry [Page 8] with it a great deal of outward glory and lustre, filling the hearts of men with expectations of much happinesse to ensue, (and no wonder if it be therefore entertain'd with generall applause especially of the Vulgar sort) yet when we come ad practicandum; to consider how this notion may best be made practicall and put in execution, wee shall then meet with such impediments, and in­conveniences, as shall render the performance (to say no worse) very far short of promise, and ex­pectation. And for my owne part (submitting still to better judgements) I do find it so unin­telligible and unpracticable, that however it is pre­tended (and that very highly) by others, yet in my apprehension (and indeed the processe of the World sheweth no lesse) 'tis only a Thing for weaker Parties to talke on.

For, (to remind you onely of what others have more fully discuss'd) if a Toleration must be admitted, then either Universall and unlimited, (such as may comprehend even the Papists them­selves) or else Particular, (i. e.) limited to some peculiar Persons or Parties.

As to the first, 'tis so perfectly wild and ex­travagant, that (in the judgement of all sober [Page 9] Protestants) it rather deserves an explosive scorn then a serious confutation.

For the second, viz: a particular and limited; unless (which seems the likeliest way to bring the work to some Issue) the dissenting Parties (who are many and of different perswasions) would clearly and distinctly acquaint the world, (in some publick Writing unanimously own'd) who they are that shall be indulged, and upon what conditions, we are yet never the nearer.

They give us indeed (by way of Resolution) some generall expressions: but these then are of so doubtfull, (I had almost said impossible) in­terpretation; that I appeal to any rational man (all prejudice and interest lay'd aside) whether such uncertainty's can be laid as a sufficient Foundation, on which to raise so considerable a structure as the Peace of the Church, and Pro­sperity of the Nation.Disc. of Relig. Title pag.

For whilst they tell us of Reformed Religion to be settled in its due Latitude, and yet never ac­quaint us what we are to understand by this due Latitude, what is the full extent, and meaning of the Word: whilst they propose; that the Parties Disc. of Rel. Par. 1. p. 18. comprehended in their establishment shall be of impor­tance [Page 10] in the Publicke Interest, and of Principles con­gruous to such stated Order in the Church, as the sta­bility of the Commonwealth requires: and yet never inform us what these important Interests, and con­gruous Principles are; what other is it, but to tri­fle us with Ambiguities and Amusements? to trou­ble both themselves and others, in thus fiercely contending for a Toleration, in no body know's What, and to be granted to no body know's Whom?

I have given you a reflection, which if duely improv'd by some happier Pen, might possibly appeare of more difficult resolution, then your present Sentiments (occasion'd by the mean­ness of its delivery) may invite you to appre­hend.

However, I am sure (as to mee) it hath been of sufficient moment to revise my former Thoughts; and to shew lesse kindnesse to your present Toleration, towards which I have been (very lately) more warmly affected.

But (to come yet closer to my intendment) that which did more fully (and if I mistake not unanswerably) convince me, was the peru­sall of severall Sermons preached by some of [Page 11] our late eminent Divines (before the two Houses of Parliament) on solemn occasions. For I must not omit to tell you, that having heard those Dis­courses much commended (as being delivered by such famous Preachers, before such as were reputed so wise and judicious Auditors as the Lords, and Commons, and therefore without doubt did contain somewhat extraordinary) I procu­red a good number of them (about an hundred) and as my other occasions would permit (not without much expectation) set my selfe to the reading of them.

And indeed (that I may be faithfull to the me­mory of those Persons) I must acknowledge both to you and the world, I received no bad return of my labours; for I found (which is chiefely to my present purpose to observe) this point of Tole­ration so excellently, and fully discussed (though obiter only and as it were by the by) that no tract ex instituto (and there are some very ingenious) could ever afford me the like satisfaction.

Now that this may not be gratis & precario dictum; I shall very faithfully lay down their own Reasons in their own words; and then leave it to you and all men to consider; whether it be [Page 12] not (morally at least) impossible; that so many excellently learned, and eminent Divines, shoud so frequently, (and that with such vehemency of zeale) oppose the very Name of Toleration (and which is yet more observable, that those very Sermons in which these invectives are contained, should not only receive the Thanks of the two Houses, but by their especiall order, be likewise made Publick) were there not some secret Dan­ger in the Thing, which either the Interest, or Se­curity of the present Age, will not now suffer us to apprehend?

I speak as unto Wise men, Judge ye what I say.
[Page] [Page]
  • Dr. Cornelius Burgesse.
  • Mr. John Ward.
  • Mr. William Good.
  • Mr. Thomas Thorowgood.
  • Mr. Humphrey Hardwick.
  • Mr. Arthur Salwey.
  • Mr. William Reyner.
  • Mr. Thomas Case.
  • Mr. John Lightfoot.
  • Mr. Thomas Watson.
  • Mr. George Hughes.
  • Mr. Edmund Calamy.
  • Mr. Richard Baxter.
  • Mr. Thomas Horton.
  • Mr. Lazarus Seaman.
  • Mr. Matthew Newcomen.
  • Mr. Richard Vines.
  • Mr. Simeon Ash.
  • Mr. James Cranford.
  • Mr. Thomas Edwards.
Cujus aures clausae veritati sunt, ut ab amico verum audire nequeat, hujus salus desperanda est. Cic. Rhet. l. 1.

The Testimonies of the fore-mentioned Divines against Toleration.

‘GIve me leave, I beseech you, to speak freely toDr. Corn. Burgesse Serm. before the house of Commons Novemb. 5. 1641. p. 60. Lond. prin­ted for C. Meredith at the Crane in St. Pauls Church­yard. 1641. you; I will do it humbly too.’

At your first sitting down, you expressed many brave and noble resolutions, of giving Gods busi­ness the precedency of all other your Affairs: and your beginnings promised much. Howbeit, I know not how it comes to pass, but so it is, that Gods work lies yet un­done. Matters of Religion lie a bleeding; all Govern­ment and Discipline of the Church is laid in her Grave, and all putredinous vermine of bold Schismaticks and frantick Sectaries glory in her ashes, making her fall, their own rising to mount our Pulpits, to offer strange fire, to expell the gravest, ablest, and most eminent Mi­nisters in the Kingdome; (if not out of their Pulpits yet) out of the hearts of their People, as a company of weak men, formalists, time-servers, no Ministers of Christ, but Limbs of Antichrist; having no calling ex­cept from the Devill; and to forsake our Assemblies as Babylonish and Antichristian; so as in short time they will not leave us the face of a Church. And yet No Course is taken to suppress their fury & to reduce them to Or­der, which (as things now stand) will never be, till you put your hands to the Cure. P. 63. I beseech you therefore, in the Name of that great God, whom you serve, and who hath hitherto blest you, and for the Peace and prospe­ritie of this Church and Kingdome, to resume and [Page 16] pursue your first thoughts of setting up God and his or­dinances, as becomes you in a regular way—P. 64. That our Church and the Government thereof may be no lon­ger laid waste, and exposed to Confusion, under the plausible pretence of Not forceing mens Consciences. To put all men into a course of Order and Vniformity in Gods way, is not to force the Conscience, but to set up God in his due place, and to bring all his people into the path of righteousnesse and life.

Serm: befor the Com­mons at a publick Fast March 30 1642 p. 35. ‘Be there none of you that foresee the fatal mischiefs of leaving all men to their liberties in the things of God and yet want hearts to use your Skill and interest to make hast to settle matters of Religion, least you come too late with a Remedy when the disease is growne in­curable, and the Kingdome growne to that passe (as the grave Historian noted of old Rome) that it can neither beare the malady, nor endure the Cure. P. 46. Do you not see or hear dayly of the disorders, sects, rents, and Schismes that every where bud forth already, and threaten all Or­der, Unitie, and Goverment. Give the water but a passage without speedy making up the Banks, and you know how soon whole Seas will breake in upon us, and render all irrecoverable and incurable. If one difficulty occur to day, it will be doubled, yea multiplied to morrow. There is no Hydra so fertil of heads, as Errour and schisme grown to some strength and maturity. It will aske you but a short time of Connivence, afterwards there well be no curbing nor shameing of it. Nothing is so con­fident as ignorance, impudent as falshood, and catching as Errour.’

Serm: be­fore the Commons at a publick Fast April. 30. 1645. P. 51. & 52. ‘Take heed of those spirits of Errour, who with faire (speciouse, pargetted, glozeing words) seeke to make [Page 17] merchandize of you, beguiling unstable soules. Beware of those compliances with, and indulgences to all sorts of Sects and Schismes now pleaded for, both by word and writing, as it were part of Christs Legacy, and his Peoples Liberty to be of what Religion they will; to be tolerated in any opinions never so erroneous and perni­tious (untill further light:) that it is the Magistrates, du­ty to protect them in that liberty; and that the contrary thereunto is to persecute Christ.’

‘Hath God inserted this as one maine branch of his Grand covenant with his People under the Gospell; I will give them one heart and one way that they may fear me Jer. 32. 39. for ever, * that is, that they may all call upon the name of the Lord to serve him with one consent? Zeph; 3. 9. Did Christ ascend up on high and give gifts unto men, and gave some Apostles, some Prophets, and some Evangelists, and some Pastors and Teachers, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, 'till we all come, [...]. into the unity of the Faith; and, is it Persecution, and Anti­christianisme to engage all to Vnity and Vniformity? Doth Paul bid the Philippians to beware of the Concisi­on? Philippians 3. 2. Doth he beseech the Romans to marke those which cause Divisions and Offences contrary to the doctrine which they had learned, and to avoid them; and that upon this ground, that they who are such, serve not the Lord Iesus but their own bellies, however by good words and fair speeches they deceive the hearts of the simple? Rom: 16. 17. Doth he writing to the Galatians wish, I would they were even cut off that trouble you, And yet the Author of Libert. of Consc. (p. 32.) tels us that this Text is lit­tle to the purpose. Gal: 5. 12. And is it such an hainous offence now, for the faithfull Servants of Christ, [Page 18] to advise you to the same course? O Heavens? be asto­nished at this; and blush for the ignorance of some, and impudence of others, that dare so boldly presse for such a Toleration, which none but vaine destructive thoughts of carnall men can look upon, without indignation and hor­ror.’

‘Beware how you hearken to these Empiricks and Sy­rens, who seeke to charme the world into a deep sleepe, by presenting their confidence of a necessity of comply­ing with all sorts of Sectaries, yea of trusting the Sword in their hands, and to defer the settling of matters of Re­ligion during the war, for feare of loosing the Godly Party (as too many proudly stile themselves, by way of difference from all that are not of their opinions and ways) what is this but to teach God a new forme of Politicks, to proclaime, that it is not alwaies safe to hold out the truth of the Gospel [...], and to command all men to embrace it, but much safer to halt between two opinions? Belike Josiah went beyond his bounds, when after himselfe had sworn a solemne Covenant to the Lord he made all Judah and Benjamin to stand to it, and made all that were present in Israel to serve the Lord their God. 2 Chron: 34. 32, 33. and Asa much more, when he drew all the people into a Covenant, That whosoever would not seek the Lord God of Israel; should be put to death, whether small or great, man or woman 2 Chron. 15. 13. The Au­thor of Lib. of Cons. p. 28. assures us the con­t [...]a [...]y when he rells as that What was done by the Kings of Israel & Judah can­not be rea­sonably made a rule to Magi­strats now under the Gospell. But the ample and transcendent Commendations which the Lord gives unto these pious Kings, especially in reference to their since­rity, and zeale in reforming and settling of Religion in one Vniforme way, may sufficiently warrant and encourage all Religious Magistrates, to take care that all under their [Page 19] Government, should all serve the Lord with one shoulder; this being not a Tyranny over men, but the Priviledge of the Gospel, Beware yet at last of that thought, that it is not yet time to build the Lords house. Judah paid dear for this, as I have heretofore shewed you at large, on Psalm: 76. 10. and in my former Sermon on this Text, and therefore shall spare my selfe and you, the paines of inlarging at the present. Settle this in your hearts; Gods Truth, the true Worship and Discipline of Christ, set up and established in one Vniforme way, never preju­dic'd any Nation or State (where it had free passage) in the least degree, but hath ever been their safety, happi­nesse, and honour. It is Errour (how much soever cry­ed up) not truth (how much soever cryed downe and blasphemed)’ that makes and foments rents and factions.

Mr. John Ward of Ipswich in his Serm: before the Commons March 26 1645 p. 49. Lon prin­ted for C. Meredith. 1645. ‘Honourable and beloved, yet another word of Exhorta­tion to judge for God, and as God judgeth. 1. for God. There are matters of God, as well as matters of the King or Kingdome; the care whereof must be upon you, as well as upon us; his Church, his Kingdome, his City, his house, his People, his Spouse, his Children, his body, ye as nursing Fathers, must tender the good and welfare of them, that they may find harbour and protection, enjoy their just priviledges, and Liberties, where­with’ Christ hath made them free: not such licentiouse­nesse as is abus'd for a Cloake of Naughtinesse. Ye must ‘see to order and Unity amongst them, that there be no rents and schismes; surely our Saviour that ascended into heaven and gave gifts to men, some Apostles, &c: that wee might all meet in the Vnitie of faith; and hath divers times, and after sundry manners, given that very thing in charge to his ministers, would not have the [Page 20] Magistrate left at large from providing, and endeavour­ing, that speaking or following the truth in love, we may grow up, making increase by edifying our selves and one another in Love.’

‘Ye must doe that, which we are to pray, that ye doe viz. Take a Course that Christians may live in a Peacea­ble and quiet life in Godlinesse and honesty, not in strife and contention.’

‘There is—His Name, it may not be blasphemed, dishonoured. His Day, it must be sanctified. His Gospell. Ye have Authority, and it is your duty to provide that it be duely preached. P. 50 That it be truly taught:’ not blended, adulterated, made another Gospell

‘His Worship; it must not be corrupted by Idolatry, su­perstitious Innovations, lest God be worshipped in vaine while they teach for Doctrines the Commandments of men. His Ministrie, it ought to be purged, planted, lights set up in every bowle of the Candlestick, encou­raged, maintained, and abetted in the work of the Lord.’

‘His Sacraments, it is your honour as your duty to see that they be kept pure in the celebration and ministration, of them. There is a book-case for it. Num. 9. 7. there were certaine men &c: but if this be not full, the Presidents. 2 Chron: ch: 15. ch: 30. and ch: 35 will rule the Case for the Civill Magistrate, and make out this: That where the Doctrine and Discipline of the Church doth not, or cannot prevaile, the Magistrate must interpose his Coercive Power for restraint and re­medy—in a word: God hath many things amongst us that must be protected and maintain [...]d; and the matters of God have many adversaries which must be watched, [Page 21] and suppressed; for ye bear not the sword in vain, ye are Gods Ministers attending continually upon this very thing. Magistrates and Ministers have (as ye see) one common style of Office; that ye in your place, and we in our Function and Order, should mind and promove the things of God; ye by the Sword, and we by the Word; you are keepers of both Tables, the first and great command­ment, as well as the second that is like unto it, both come sometimes as occasion is under your cognizance:’ P. 51. ‘And ye know what a brand sticks to this day upon Gallio (though an Heathen Magistrate) that he cared not for the matters of the Law and Worship according to the Law when question was brought; no, though there were insurrections and tumults upon that occasion: and for Gamaliels counsell, Refrain from these men and let them alone: for if this counsell or this work, be of men, it will come to naught; but if it be of God, ye cannot over­throw it, lest happly ye be found even to fight against God If this be true the Auth: of the Prop. for King and Kingdome shewed more zeale then knowledge, when ha­ving menti­oned the Counsell of Gamalielhe thus addes. though it be found within the Bible, yet it is not of like Authority with one of Solomons proverbs or maximes of Policy: it hath no otherwise the approba­tion of God for good, then the designe of Pharaoh, orI wish to the Lord, the great Ministers of our state wo [...]ld be content to be no wiser men then Gamaliel P. 36. the crafty counsell of Achitophel which are also recorded in the scripture: it will not consist with other rules of the word, and hath been condemned as unsound, and unsafe by many godly and wise men; we have more sure words of scripture out of which we draw the doctrine of the Magistrates power and duty in the matters of God and Religion, then the loose speech of such a Neutralist and time serving Politician as Gamaliel was. Go on there­fore, I beseech you as you began; take us the little foxes as well as the ravening wolves. p. 26. These be they who sepe­rate [Page 22] themselves, sensual not having the spirit. They Boast indeed (much) of the spirit, but they manifestly do the works of the flesh. They plead for liberty, but it is licentiousnesse. Liberty of Conscience they term it, but it is Liberty of practise, that every man may do what is good and right in his own eyes. They pretend to nothing but Piety and Godlinesse, and seem as if they would be content if they might but have a bare subsistence in the profession of it. So did the Jesuites to learning, when they first appeared upon the Stage, but when they had once insinuated themselves into the good Opinion of Princes and States, how well they answered the expectations, and required the kindnesse of those who nursed them up all the Christian world sees and fe [...]ls to their cost at this day. They aske But Connivence and Toleration, but if they once meet in a confluence, and find themselves strong enough to run in a streame; let but a damme be Pitcht down to restraine or oppose their madnesse, or men fol­low not on, to indulge and grati [...]y their humour, it would soon appeare, whether o [...] [...]o they would rage & swell & get over, or bear down afore them all that should stand in their way. They did seem a while to cry up the Order of Parliaments and of the Civil Magistrate, and have their persons in admiration, but mee [...]ly for advantage, that so they may get above all Ecclesiasticall Authority; & when they are once up to their height, what they will do with the Ladder, they hope to climbe and ascend by, is not hard to conjecture. They reckon themselves the VVheat in the field, and when once they are ripe, they will easily be content to have all that threshed of, by which they re­ceived their growth. Ye have heard of the fable of the Snake and the Countryman that brought it unto the fire▪ [Page 23] I shall not need to apply it. Already they begin to re­move the old land markes and Straiten their bounds they deny their claime up to an high water marke, and make their bankes, and inclose for themselves to the ve­ry channel side. But whether it be holden fit or seasona­ble that these Libertines be decried, for my part, I cannot yet discover by any activenesse to suppresse them: onely seeing the evil and foreseeing the mischiefe, I have given the warning; that at least I may deliver mine own soule. I pray God the remedy be not deferred till it be too late and ye be driven to play an after-game to an extreame hazard and disadvantage.’

Mr. Will­am Good Serm: before the Comm: March 26. 1645. Lo [...]d prin­ted for C. Meredith 1645. P. 36. ‘I doubt not but your Souls abhor that bloody Te­net to the soules of men, That it is the duty of the Ma­gistrate to Tolerate all Religions. You have carried out the Dust behind the door, and this Opinion will bring all the mire in the streets into the house of God againe. Cambyses had a lust to marry his sister, and his Counsel­lers told him, there was no law whereby to do it: But with all they told him, there was a law that the Kings of Persia might do what they list, and by this he might marry his Sister. What is it that shall be unlawfull, if this be law­full for every man to make a Law and Religion for him selfe?’

‘Put some stop by your Authority to the growth of Errours, that are destructive, to the power of Godlinesse, and let not this suspend your sanction, because some that broach them pretend to Godlinesse; an enemy the more like he is to a freind the more dangerous.’

‘a The third use of Confutation; it is of the Remon­strants [Page 24] Sure this Gentleman is mistaken, I alwaies thought Re­monstrants and Armi­nians had been the same. Arminians & Socinians, who endeavour from myM. Thomas Thorowgood Serm: be­fore the Commons at a solemn fast Dec. 25. 1644 his Text Phil. 4. v. 5. Let your mo­deration be known unto all men Lond prin­ted for Chr. Meredith 1645. p. 10 Text to get countenance for that Babylonish Errour, the allowance of all opinions, as if because the Apostle saith let your moderation be known unto all men, therefore all mens conceits must bee born with in Reli­gion, and every one suffered in what he supposeth to be truth. It is a cunning and cousening devise, that strikes in with corrupt nature; but because it offers violence to my Text, I cannot be true to it, or you, if some­what be not added by way of vindication; and it shall be in these six particulars. First is it probable that our Apostle: who elswhere almost every where is so zealous for Vnity against Schismes, should in any sort Tolerate them, and so voluntarily open a wide doore for division? in this very Epistle he writes for Peace even passionately but with with mighty power Phil. 2. 1. 2. If there be any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of Love, if any fellowship of the spirit, if any bowells and mercies, fullfill ye my joy, that ye be like-minded, having the same Love, being of one accord, and of one mind. And in the next Chap. 3. 16.—Let us walk by the same Rule, let us mind the same thing: expressions different from all licentious Tolerations. The same A­postle abounds in serious Dehortations from Schismes and dissentions, Rom. 13. 12. 16. 17. and as carnall. 1 Cor. 3. 3. and in other places. And he doth very of­ten exhort with earnest words and arguments, not only that we be like-minded, Rom: 15. 6. Phil. 2. 2. and of one mind, 2 Cor. 13. 12. but of the same mind. 1 Cor. 10, 10. joyned, yea joynted together in the same mind, and in the same judgement: And is here the least approbati­on of that multiplying Doctrine? Neither will that ex­cuse, [Page 25] so long as they all breath Christ, tend to the ad­vancement of Christ, it matters not: but let S. Paul an­swer this Objection also; is Christ divided? 1 Cor: 1. 13. Consider it well, and season your Consideration with that of our Master Christ himselfe, Mar. 9. 50. Have salt in your selves, and have Peace one with another: If we were preserved by humility from the corruptions of self­opinion, it would be no hard matter to embrace uni­ty.’

‘Secondly, such allowance would prove destructive to holiness both Personall and Domesticall; Omnis Religio & nulla Religio, would soon be the same: Suppose the Husband of one Opinion, the VVife of another, the Children, (it may be) of one or two other, and the Ser­vants of as many more; what shall the Master of the house do here? how perform the Family duties? diver­sity of Opinions, like so many hatches interrupting their prayers, 1 Pet. 3. 7. chopping all devotion and piety in pieces: As the Duke of Wittenberge was wont to say, New Garments introduce new manners, new manners bring in new men, and new men thrust out the old; so new Opinions suffered will devour the old; and the Toleration of every Religion will destroy all Religion, and in conclu­sion leave no Religion at all.’

‘Thirdly, this Liberty is inconsistent with civil tranquility; the bleeding condition of our own nation at present is a living, almost a dying witnesse of this; and if that one Re­ligion of Popery, so tolerated as it was, hath brought in upon us so many destructions; what will that multiplica­tion do, but hasten desolation without recovery? for eve­ry part would endeavour to support it selfe, to the pre­judice of the rest, et dum de Religione certatum est Regio, [Page 26] dum de caelo terra amissa; as it was said long since.’

‘Fourthly the late Bishops of Ireland may put this Li­berty to silence and shame; for when not long since a To­leration of Popery in that Kingdome was proposed they said, To give the Papists a Toleration is a grievous sin, and will make us accessary to all their Abominations and the perdition of all seduced soules.’

‘Fiftly this may be currant Doctrine amongst the Turks and Defence of Prop. p. 20 highly commends this judge­ment of the wise Empe­rour Soly. man, and is sorry that his Adver­sary is of a­nother hu­mour. the grand Seignior told his Mufti, that is, his chief Priest, As a garden is beautified with variety of of flowers so his Empire would be adorned with diversities of Re­ligion. Let such Toleration find allowance in the Turk's Paradise, it shall never, I trust, be planted in the Para­dise of God.’

‘Sixthly Wee have undertaken all in the National Covenant, the establishment of Uniformity, and how can that stand with this Omniformity indeed Nulliformity, I understand not: it was a prodigiouse thing in the dayes of Jeremiah the Prophet, Jer. 2. 28. according to the Num­ber of thy Cities are thy Gods, O Judah: here would soon appear another kind of multiplying and increase; but though this fancy be never so plausible, Divine pro­vidence hath shut it out of our campe by our Covenant.’

M. Humph. Hardwick Ser. before the Comm: June 26. 1644. Lond print­ed for Chr. Meredith 1645. P. 43. ‘A thing pleasing to God and profitable to the King­domes, by which there is and through Gods blessing may be the most famous blow given to the whore of Ba­bylon, and her Bastard Impes that ever yet was: now to have this sticke among us or laid aside, whilst Malig­nants and Sectaries live in our Bosome, blessing, and in se­cret applauding themselves, that they have neither taken this nor any of your former protestations. This is our case, and I appeal to wiser Judgements, whether this may [Page 27] not be the way to lessen the honour and Authority of the high court of Parliament. M. Arth: Salwey be­fore the Com: Octob. 25. 1643 p. 19. Lond. printed for Chr. Mere­dith. 1644. Consider I beseech you (Wor­thy Christians) that the vowes of God are upon you, you have abjured Neutralitie in your late Solemne Covenant, far be it from any of you to glory in luke warm indif­ferency, as if it were a piece of singular Policy. You have with your Tongues renounced this Neutrality as detesta­ble. Follow the Lord in promoting a National Reforma­tion. You have an admirable Patterne; the zealous Pro­phet Elijah; I wish from my soule that a double portion of his spirit may be given unto you, that you may act in his power and spirit. Elijah oppos'd Idolatry and Oppression; so do ye: down with Baals Altars, down with Arch-Bishops, Bi­shops, Deans, Chapters. &c. Baals Priests; do not (I beseech you) consent unto a To­leration of Baals Worship in this Kingdome upon any Politicke consideration whatsoever—Give me leave to be your humble Remembrancer. The mouths of your Adversaries are opened against you; the hearts of your true freinds are griev'd, that so many Honest Royalists. Delinquents are in Prison, and yet but very few of them brought to their tryal. M. Williā Reyner be­fore the Com. Aug. 28. 1644 Lond. Printed for Sam. En. derby 1644. p. 12. Ye cannot preach, nor pray Errours & Hersy. them down direct­ly, and immediately—well, that which the Word can­not do, the Sword shall; that which the water cannot wash out the fire will burn out; unto this particular the Apostle applies this very Haggai 2. 6. 7. Text in part, namely concern­ing the shakeing of the heavens &c: an Earthquake (as we have heard) was appointed to shake down the Ce­remoniall ordinances; now if this were necessary for the abolition of that divine Worship which had sometimes been by Gods own holy Institution, how much more shall that which hath beene of human Invention (yea the very fumes and fogs of the bottomlesse Pit) to Gods in­finite [Page 28] displeasure and dishonour, be tumbled down with violence, and vengeance to hell, from whence it came.’

M. Thomas Case Serm: before the Comm: May 26. 1647. p. 33. Lond printed for Luke Fawne at the Par. rot in Pauls Church yard. 1647. ‘There is a word of Exhortation behind, and I beseech you suffer it.’

‘First, to you Honourable and noble Patriots, who are called to be Reformers and healers of a poor broken Kingdom. Doth not indeed the punishing and suppressing of spirituall whoredomes against God, Idolatrie, Heresie, Blasphemie, and the rest: doth it not belong unto you, as well as the punishing bodily whoredomes, theft, mur­der &c:? doth it indeed belong to you only to looke to the civil peace, and to let Religion, and truth, and the worship of God stand or fall to their own master? fight God, fight Divell, fight Christ, fight Antichrist, catch that catch can; you have nothing to do but to stand by and looke on, say so then; speake out, publish it in your Declarations to the world, and let the People of England know that it is the right and liberty, to which the Subjects of England, are borne, that Every man hold what he please, and publish, and preach what he holds; that it is the birth-right (as some would have it) of the free born people of England every man to Worship God according to his own Conscience, and to be of what Religion his own Conscience shall dictate. Do so and see (Fathers and Brethren) how long your Civill peace will secure you when Religion is destroyed; how long it will be ete your civill peace be turned into civill war, for no doubt if this once be granted them, but they may in good time come to know also (there be them, that are instruct­ing them evē in these principles too) that it is their birth­right to be freed from the power of Parliaments, and [Page 29] from the power of Kings; and to take up armes against both when they shall not vote and act according to their hu­mours. Liberty of Conscience (falsly so called) may in good time, improve it selfe into liberty of Estates, and liberty of Houses, and liberty of wives, and in a word liberty of perdition of souls and bodies.’

‘Right Honourable and worthy Gentlemen, I cannot stand to dispute, this only would I know of you; are I­dolaters, and Hereticks, and Blasphemers, and Seducers are they evill doers? if so, then look to your Charge Rom. 13, 4. Rulers must be a Terror to evill Doers unless ye mean to bear the sword in vaine. And if you will God will not; and if God take the Sword into his own hand once, (as he seems to be a doing of it) he will smite to purpose; he will execute vengeance throughly: both upon the evill doers, and upon you that have not been a Terrour to them. Oh therefore up and be doing, that ye may deliver the Kingdome out of the hand of the Lord; for it is a fearfull thing to fall into the hands of the living God. O let not your Patience (I hope it is no more all this while) be interpreted a Con­nivence, and your Connivence be taken for a Toleration, it may be the Kingdoms ruine,’ but it will be your sin.

Ser before the Com: Feb. 19. 1645. p. 25. ‘Fathers and brethren how will ye call this keeping of Covenant with God? Had we a Parliament of Apostate Julians, of whom it is reported, that at what time he o­pened the temples of the Heathenish Gods, he set o­pen the Christian Churches, call'd home all the Chri­stians whom he had banisht, both Orthodox and Here­tick, and gave them (as we call it) Liberty of Consci­ence, but as Austin more truly phraseth it, Aug. Ep. 166. vid. Ammi­an Marcel. lib. 22. p. 208. 209 Edit. Hen: Valesii. Defence of the Prop. calls this of Julian a brave and Politick thing. p 98. Libertatem perditionis, Liberty to destroy themselves; for that was [Page 30] his Policy and end, namely by liberty of all Religions,Eo modo putans Chri­stianum no­men posse perire de terris &c. to destroy the True, and the Professors thereof too. Or had we a Parliament of careless Gallio's we should not wonder: but for a Parliament of Christians, Protestants, Professors, the Choisest, the most active that could be cull'd out of a Christian State, the like not under heaven; that these things should be done, and you hold your Peace, and be able to keep your places, and not to put on Righteousness as a Breast-plate, and the Garments of Vengeance for your Cloathing, as it is said of God; this makes the Churches abroad to wonder what Englands Parliament is a doing, and all at home that love the Lord Jesus Christ more then their own Interests and Notions, to be filled with unspeakable trembling and astonishment, to wit, what God means to do with this poor bleeding Church and State.’

Ser. before the Comm. Aug. 22. 1645. p. 29. ‘If you mean that England shall be turned into a wil­dernes, and be over-run with Atheisme, and Heresie, and Prophaneness, and Blasphemy, you may hold your hands, and you need not do it long.’

Ser. before the Comm: Feb. 19. 1645. p. 25. ‘The Errors and Innovations under which we so much groan'd of later years were but tolerabiles ineptiae, tolerable trifles, childrens play, compared with these damnable doctrines, Doctrines of Devils, as the Apostle calls them: Polygamy, Arbitrary Divorce, Mortality of the Soule, No Ministery, No Churches, No Ordinances; No Scripture, yea, the very Divinity of Christ and the Holy Ghost questioned by some, denyed by others, And the very foundation of all these laid in such a Schisme of Boundless Liberty of Conscience, viz: Be­lieve what you will, and Preach what you Believe, and such Lawless separation of Churches: and all these not [Page 31] only whispered in Corners, but Preacht on the house top, yea, publisht in Print before your faces with so much virulency and impudence, that I verily believe no Age since the Apostles time could ever parallel.’

Sermon before the Commons May 26. 1647. p. 25. ‘There be a Generation of men in the Land that stand up for all kind of false Worship; that every man may Worship God after his own Conscience, or if they will not own it in words at length they will have it in figures: And if they may not, are ready, not only to cry, but to act Persecution, and that to purpose: for while they cry Per­secution gladio oris they are ready to act persecution ore gladii. I pray God it may never be englished.’

M. John Lightfoot Ser: before the Comm. Aug. 26. 1645. p. 30. Lond-print­ed for And. Crook at the Green Dragon in Pauls Chur: yard. 1645. ‘There is great talk of, and pleading for Liberty of Conscience, for men to do in matters of Religion, as Israel did in the booke of Judges, whatsoever seemeth good in their own eyes; and how that proved there, there are sad stories that relate. I shall not goe about to deter­mine the question, whether the Conscience may be bound or not, though for mine own satisfaction I am re­solved it may, and do hold it a truer point in Divinity that errans conscientia liganda, then ligat, but certainly the Devil in the Conscience may be, nay he must be bound, or else you act not according to that vigour that Christ hath put into your hands, nor according to that exactness that Christ requireth at your hands. It is true indeed which is so much talked of, that Christ alone must reign in the Conscience, but it is as true also, that he doth so by the Power that he hath put into the hands of the Magi­strate, as well as by his word and spirit.’

M. Thom: Watson be­fore the Com: Decem 27. 1649. p. 17. Lond. Printed for Ra: Smith at the Bible in Cornhil 1649. ‘If Conscience be a sufficient plea, the Papist will come in for a Childs part. Conscience must have a Rule, it binds only virtute praecepti, by virtue of a precept. If [Page 32] Conscience goes against the Word, Deponenda est talis Conscientia. Get conscience better informed.’

M. Hughes Serm. be­fore the Com: May 26. 1647. p. 34. Lond. Printed for John Roth well at the Sun & foun­tain in Pauls Ch­yard. ‘I must say that the Toleration of all things must be a destructive Principle to the State or Church where ever it be allowed. Experience hath shewed us no less in Kingdoms and Churches Called by Gods name. These are only sug­gested which need a larger Treatise to state fully. Ye Ser­vants of Christ, take heed of yeelding to the pretences of Conscience, the Devil and not Christ hath his▪ Throne there; And no stronger hold for him than Conscience if he once take it. Christ will not suffer him to shelter there, therefore ye may not, so much as in you lieth.’

‘Doe not other States, as some of the united ProvincesDub. tolerate all these Heresies, and protect them, and yet they prosper? who more?’

‘I desire not to deal with other States, unless I might doSol. them good, I am now only called to our own, yet others being made exemplary, a word in soberness and truth may not offend. I suggest only these thoughts.’

1. Can any man say, that prosperity is a sign peculiar ‘un­to Truth? then let Rome come in and speak more than any for outward prosperity.’

2. ‘Are not spirituall wickednesses as odious to God as carnall? and are not these Heresies such, which God condemnes as works of the flesh, inconsistent with the Kingdome of Christ?’

3. ‘Hath God made an end yet of visiting Nations for the sinnes of them? when God hath done judging were a better time to urge this Example then now. I pray God the evill day may not overtake those States; the good Lord cause the Cup of trembling to pass by them and purge their iniquities peaceably. But I am pressed in [Page 33] Spirit to say, God hath not spared such State Polities, which have sought their own rise by the ruine of God and his Truth. Witness Jeroboam the Son of Nebat, who made Israel to sin. And he bids sin that doth not hinder Qui non ve­tat peccare cum potest jubet. Sen. it when he can—Gods Truth, my beloved, and not mans example must be the Rule—if Heresies yet must be, let us mourn for what we cannot help; it is a mi­serable necessity when not allowed; it will be rejoycing in iniquity, either for State or Church willfully to tole­rate.’

M. Ed. Ca­lamy Ser. be­fore the Ld Mayor Jan. 14. 1645. p. 3. ‘Though God hath given us glorious victories over our Enemies, yet the Churches of Christ ly desolate, Church-Reformation is obstructed, Church-Discipline unsetled, Church-Divisions increased. The famous Ci­ty of London is become an Amsterdam, Separation from our Churches is countenanced, Toleration is cryed up, Au­thority lyeth asleep.—Ser. before the Lords Dec. 25. 1644. p. 13. It would seem a wonder if I should reckon how many seperated Congregations, or ra­ther Segregations, there are in the Citty: what Churches against Churches &c.—the Lord Knows that I men­tion these things with a sad heart. ut supra p. 4. Divisions whether they be Ecclesiasticall or Politicall, in Kingdomes, Citties, or Families, are infallible causes of Ruine to Kingdoms, Cit­ties, and Families.’

p. 14. ‘Hereby the hearts of People are mightily distra­cted, many are hindred from Conversion, and even the Godly themselves have lost much of the power of God­liness in their lives. I say the hearts of People mightily disturbed, while one Minister preacheth one thing as a truth of the Gospel, and another Minister Preacheth the quite Contrary with as much Confidence as the for­mer.’

P. 17. ‘If Divisions be so destructive to Kingdoms, Cities, and Families? this reproveth those that are the Authors and Fomentors of these Divisions that are now amongst us. These are the Incendiaries of England. If he that sets one house on fire deserveth hanging, much more they that set a whole Kingdom on fire. If he that murders one man must be put to death, much more he that Murders three Kingdoms: Mark them (saith the Apostle Rom. 16. 17.) that cause divisions and Offences contrary to the Do­ctrine which ye have Learned and avoid them. Avoid them as the greatest enemies of England. These are like the Salamander that cannot live but in the fire of contention. These are of a Jesuiticall spirit. And no doubt the heads and hands of the Jesuits are in all our Divisions.’

P. 33. ‘Take heed of the Land-destroying opinion of those that plead for an illimited toleration of all Religions, e­ven of Turkisme, Judaisme, &c. The Lord keep us from being poysoned with such an Error! * This TextMat. 12. 25. Every King­dom divi­ded against it selfe is brought to Desolation. riseth up against it, for it will divide a Kingdome against it self. It will rend it in a thousand pieces. It is a Do­ctrine directly contrary to your late Oath and Covenant. A Doctrine that overthroweth all Church Government, bringeth in Confusion, and openeth a wide door unto all irreli­gion and Atheisme: For at the same door that all false Re­ligions comes in, the true Religion will quickly get out, and if it be as good for a man to live where nothing is lawfull, as where all things are lawfull; surely it is every way as uncomfortable to live where there are all Religi­ons, as where there is no Religion at all.’

P. 37. ‘It is your Duty (Right Honourable) whom God hath betrusted with great Power, to suppress these Di­visions [Page 35] and Differences in Religion, by your Civil Au­thority, as farr as you are able, least you are accessary un­to them. For God hath made you Custodes utrius (que) Ta­bulae, Keepers not of the second Table only (as some fondly imagine) but of the First Table also, and not on­ly Keepers, but vindices utrius (que) Tabulae, Punishers also of those that transgress against either of them. For you are the Ministers of God for good, and Revengers, to exe­cute wrath upon him that doth evill, Rom. 13. 4. and God hath deputed you for the Punishment of evill doers, and for the Praise of them that do well. 1. Pet. 2. 19. There be some that would blot out halfe your Commis­sion, and restrain this good and evill, to Civil good, and to evils only against men. But this is against that gene­rall Rule, Non est distinguendum, ubi Lex non distinguit. Where the Law doth not distinguish, there must not we distinguish. Tell me I beseech you, Shall it be law­full for Magistrates to punish those that destroy mens Bodies, but not those that destroy mens Souls? Shall they be blamed for suffering men to draw people away from o­bedience to the Laws of the Land, and to themselves, and not also for suffering men to draw away people from the Truth of the Gospell, and from the ways of God, such as Hymenaeus and Philetus, who overthrow the Faith of some, and their words eat as a Canker? shall Christian Magistrates take up the Maxime of Tiberius, Deorum injurias Diis curae esse? Let God himself take care to vindicate himself from injuries committed a­gainst God? as for mee, I will (just like Gallio) take care of none of these things. Can Christian ears endure such Language? Doth not God Prophesy, Isaiah 49. 23. That in the New Testament Kings shall be our Nur­sing [Page 36] Fathers, and Queens our nursing Mothers? And how can a Christian Magistrate discharge that duty aright if he hath not power from God, to punish those that would poyson the souls of his weak Children with Heresies and soul destroying opinions?’

‘Will you allow the Magistrate to Tyrannize over Object. mens Consciences?’

‘By no means. But I believe it is the duty of Magistrats Answ. to keep men from infecting their Subjects with soul de­stroying Errors. If thou hast an Hereticall Opinion, have it to thy self, and the Magistrate will not; nay, cannot meddle with thy Private Conscience. But if thou labou­rest to infect others with thy Grace-destroying Opinions, I doubt not but the Magistrate is bound to keep thee from spreading thy infection to the undoing of the Souls of his Subjects. If he may lawfully shut up a man that hath the Plague upon his body, that he may not infect others, why not a man that hath the Plague of Heresie upon his Soul, that so he may not destroy the souls of Thousands. Shall a Master in a Family have power to put away a Servant that is tainted with a gross opinion, and yet not be called a Tyrant over that Servants Conscience? and shall not the chief Magistrate of a Kingdome have power to put out of his Kingdome (at least to shut up from doing hurt) one that is his Subject and polluted with blas­phemous, Hereticall, Idolatricall Opinions? Is not the Kingdom the Magistrats house and Family?’

Ser. before the Comm. Octob. 22. 1644. p. 26. ‘This is a certain Rule, That all the Sins of the King­dom which are committed by your connivence or allow­ance, are the Parliament Sins, and they call for a Parlia­ment Repentance. And therefore I beseech you search and [Page 37] try your hearts, and consider how far you are accessary to the sins of the Kingdome, that so you may be wrought up not only to a personall but a Parliament humilia­tion. And if it doth appear, that you have taken more care in setling your own Liberties, then in setling of Re­ligion▪ If you have taken more care to build your own houses then Gods house, this is a crying Sin; and this makes you accessary to a Thousand Sins that are commit­ed in the Kingdome. Againe, if you do not labour ac­cording to your duty, and according to your power, to suppress the Errors and Heresies that are spread in the Kingdome; all these Errors are your Errors, and these Heresies are your Heresies, and they are your Sins, and God calls for a Parliamentary Repentance from you for them this day; You are the Anabaptists, and you are the Antinominians, and it is you that hold That all Religions are to be tolerated &c. And these are your Errors if they sptead by your Connivence. For the Sins of the Sons of old Ely are imputed to old Ely himselfe. And when the People of Israel had prophaned the Sabbath, Nehemiah con­tended with the Nobles of Judah for suffering them, and tells them, that it was they that did prophane it, be­cause they suffered the People to prophane it, Neh. 13. 17.’

‘It was none of the Old cause that the People should M. Ric. Baxter Ho­ly Common­wealth. Addition to Pref. Prop. 6. Lond printed for Tho: Ʋn­derhil at the Anchor and Bible in Pauls Ch: yard 1659. have Liberty and the Magistrate should have no Power in all matters of Gods Worship, faith and Conscience.’

‘And as it is not the Old Cause, so it is not a Good Cause.’

‘For first it contradicteth the expresse Revelation of the will of God in the holy Scriptures. Moses had to do in matters of Religion as a Magistrate; and so the ruling [Page 38] Elders of Israel that assisted him; And so had the Kings of Israel and Judah, as is well known, insomuch that in Asa's days they covenanted to put him to Death that would not seek the Lord God of Israel. 2. It tendeth to the ruine of the Commonwealth, and therefore it is no good cause. How God was provoked By Aarons Calfe, and by his Sons, that offered strange fire which the Lord commanded not Lev. 10. & what was the effect, & what benefit the Calves at Dan and Bethel brought to Israel and Jeroboams house, and the high places, and other Errours about worship, brought to the Princes and Peo­ple of Judah we need not particularly recite.’

‘Law and providence are quite changed, if Toleration of false Worship and other abuses of Religion, tend not to the ru­ine of the Commonwealth.’

‘If Magistrates must give Liberty for all to propagate a false Religion, then so must Parents and Masters also (for their Coercive power is rather lesse then the Ma­gistrates then more, and they are no more Lords of faith or Conscience) But if all Parents and Masters should give such a Liberty, it would be a crime so horrid in the nature and effects, as I am loath to name with its proper Titles.’

‘A pari, it tendeth to the destruction of an Army to give liberty to all men to do their worst to draw them to Mutinies and Rebellion. It tends to the ruine of Families that all have liberty to do their worst to tempt the Sons to Theft and drunkennesse, and the wife and Daughter to whoredome. It tends to the Destruction of the Com­monwealth if there be liberty for all to perswade the the People to Sedition and Rebellion: And therefore it must tend to the destruction of the Church and mens [Page 39] souls, and consequently of the Commonwealth in the cheif respects, if all have leave to do their worst to preach up infidelity, Mahometanisme, Popery or any false Doctrine or Worship, against the great and necessary Truths.’

‘I leave it therefore to the judgement of all men that are not fast a sleep in their security, and utterly unac­quainted with the advantages of the Papists, whether this designe of engageing the Magistrate by a fundamentall constitution, not to meddle with matters of faith and Worship, but leave them all to Christ alone, be not the present setting up of Popery in England, and the deliver­ing all the fruit of our labours, Prayers and victories into the Papists hands.’

‘Obj. But Liberty for Popery and Prelacy is stil ex­cepted.’

‘Answ: by whom?—But if there had been an excepti­on against Popery put in, it would have been to little purpose, as long as a generall Rule is laid down that condemneth that exception. For if it be the standing Rule, That matters of Religion and faith, and all matters of Worship are out of the Magistrates power; to say then that Popery shall be excepted from Liberty, is to say the Ma­gistrate shall intrude into the proper Office of Christ to restraine the Papists.’

‘Well, seeing these things are so; that sin will find Mr. Tho▪ Horton Ser: before the House of Peers. Dec. 30. 1646. Lond prin­ted by F. Neile for Sam: Gelli­brand at the Brazen ser­pent in Pauls Ch: yard. 1646. p. 35. out us; let this be the use wee make of it, to be carefull to find out it; and to begin with that first.’

‘This is that which lies upon us all: But especially (to speake a word in Season) upon those which have the Government of Kingdomes and Commonwealths com­mitted unto them. These had need to find out sin more [Page 40] especially, for the safety and welfare of that State, which they have the ordering and managing of.’

P. 36. First their own Personall Sins.

p. 37. & 38. ‘Secondly they are to find out also the sins of the Kingdome. I have already Administer'd some help in this performance, by the hint of those Sins before mention'd; all which I humbly desire may be taken into serious Con­sideration, and especially (which grows so much upon us and which threatens so much evil to us) the Sin of Li­bertinisme and Toleration, which is the ring-leader of all the rest and involves all others with it. O that this should ever be once mentioned amongst us here in England who have enjoyed so much of the Gospell of Truth as wee have done; derived to us from our Godly fore-fa­thers, sealed to us by the blood of the Martyrs, prosecut­ed with so many Blessings, and victories, and Gratious successes both of former and latter times, to the admi­ration both of Enemies and Friends; is this the fruit and issue of all that God hath done for us? and do all over­tures of Reformation come to this? Surely God cannot but take it very ill from us, that we should but incline and leane hereunto; As he said to David of his building of the Temple; Thou didst well that it was in thine heart and accordingly was well pleased with him. So will he say to us, of our Contrary carriage; That it is ill that it is in our heart; if so be, it be come so far, as I hope it is not. What? when we have so much appear­ed against Popery and Superstition, shall wee now begin to think of Indifferency and Toleration? Certainly it's but a sorry exchange of a Bad Religion for none. Al­though indeed it will be no exchange, but rather a fur­ther Confirmation: Toleration of all other Errours doth [Page 41] but strengthen Popery amongst the rest; which will at least think so well of it self, as to come in for a Childs Part.’

M. Lazar▪ Seaman Ser. before the Comm. Sept. 25. 1644. Lond printed by E. G. for J. Rothwell at the Sun in Pauls Ch: yard. 1644▪ p. 41. ‘There is a Generation who look for much at your hands, and yet ask nothing, I mean by way of humble Petition. When they find you, or themselves in such a posture, as that they cannot be denied, it may be you may hear of them. Besides the many loose, prophane, and scandalous Ministers, there are a new sort risen a­mongst us, who have thrust themselves into the Lords Vineyard. It's no less then Persecution (so they com­monly give out) to desire that their suspitious Opinions may be examined according to the word of God, and they commanded to forbear the publishing and spreading of them for the present. There be many dangerous Books abroad, dangerous at least, 'Ile say no more.’

  • Liberty of Conscience.
  • The Bloudy Tenent.
  • The compassionate Samaritan.
  • John Baptist.

p. 44. ‘Consider also, Solomons. His failings and beware of them. 1. He had many Wives, 1 Kings 11. 3. even seaven hundred Wives, Princesses, and three hundred Concubines. Let not us have as many Religions. There's some Analogy between the one and the other. 2. There was in his daies first a Connivance at Idolatry, then open Toleration, and with­all Apostacy. These Wives turned away his heart after other Gods; v. 4. He built an high place for Chemosh the Abomination of Moab, and for Molech the Abominati­on [Page 42] of the Children of Ammon, and likewise did he for all his strange Wives, v. 7, 8. Observe the Gradation, first Connivance, then open Toleration, herewithall Apo­stacy.’

M. Matth. New comen Ser: before the Parlia­ment. Sept. 12. 1644. Lond. prin­ted for Ch: Meredith 1644. p. 31. ‘No Reformation of Religion now: now nothing will satisfy some, but a Toleration of all Religions. and all O­pinions: Church-Government, Discipline is to some a fi­ction, to others Tyranny, and Persecution, Ah Brethren, this is a Provocation and will be a Provocation, for this God may turn us into the Wilderness again.’

P. 36. ‘We are grown beyond Arminianisme, Brownisme, Anabaptisme; we are come (I mean many among us) to down-right Libertinisme. There are two Opinions, which if encouraged (and they are encouraged if con­nived at) will open a door to Turcisme, Judaisme A­theisme, Polytheisme, any monster of Opinion. The one is. That every man is to be left to the Liberty of his own Religion, an Opinion contended for by the Bloody Te­nets, John Baptist, Liberty of Conscience, and the like Pam­phlets. An opinion most pernicious and destructive, as to the Souls of men, so to the Common-weale of the King­dome.’

‘Libertas illa quidlibet credendi (saith Gerard) nihil a­liud quam Libertas errandi &c. That Liberty of believing what men will (or of holding what Faith they please) is no other then a liberty of erring, and of erring in a mat­ter that concerns the eternall Salvation of the Soule, wherein to erre cannot but be most dangerous and de­structive—Diversity of Religion dis-joynts and di­stracts the minds of men, and is the Seminary of perpe­tuall hatreds, jealousies, Seditions, Warres, if any thing in the World be; and in a little time, either a Schisme in [Page 43] the State begets a Schisme in the Church, or a Schisme in the Church, begets a Schisme in the State. That is, either Religion and the Church is prejudic'd by Civill Contentions, or Church controversies and disputes about Opinions break out into Civill Warrs. Men will at last take up Swords and Spears, instead of Pens, and defend by Arms, what they cannot do by arguments. Once for all, it is the Preservation and Reformation of Religion which you have Covenanted to endeavour, and not a Liberty of Opinion, that will consist with neither. It is the Extir­pation of Heresy and Schisme that you have Covenant­ed; which if to be connived at, why doth the Apostle reprove the Corinthians for their Schisme, so much? and why doth our Lord Jesus commend the Angell of the Church of Ephesus, for trying those which said they were Apostles, and were not? And why is the Angell of the Church of Thyatira reproved for suffering that woman Jezabel who called her self a Prophetess, to teach and se­duce, If once we come to this, that any man be suffered to teach what he pleaseth to sedu [...]e whom he list, to be of what Faith or Religion seems good in his own eyes, farewell Covenant, farewell Reformed Religion, farewell the Peace and Glory of England, if that day once come. But you (Right Honourable) I hope better things of you though I thus speak. I hope while you live and sit in Parliament, this shall never be. It is not usuall, nay, it is not possible that they which love God sincerely, should desire to cherish differing Religions: for it is most certain he that admits contrary Religions, believes neither of them.’

Serm: at Pauls Feb. 8. 1646. Lond. printed for Ch: Mere­dith 1646. p. 14. ‘But then the question will be, Seeing there will be difference of judgment and Opinion, while we are upon [Page 44] earth, then how, or how far is this difference of judge­mentP. 14. to be permitted? how or wherein may Christians differ from one another in judgement, and yet ought to be Tolerated and born with?’

‘This is my Brethren a very grave and difficult Questi­on; Ans. and to me, considering how many places there are wherein the Holy Ghost calls upon us to endeavour to be of one mind, of the same mind, and of the same judg­ment, it is easier to tell you, wherein we may not differ in judgement, and wherein differences in judgement may not be Tolerated, then to tell you wherein they may.’

‘First therefore, I say, that as an absolute unity in judge­ment, that we should all be of the same mind in all things, is scarce to be attained in this life, though it be to be endeavoured; so an Universall and absolute Liberty of judgement, for every man to differ when he pleaseth, and in what he pleaseth, to be of what Opinion and Faith he will, is not to be endeavoured, if it might be attain'd, nor is it to be Tolerated or permitted. I know no war­rant, no pretence of warrant for it, in all the Book of God: Scripture no where saith, Let every man be of what Opinion, and of what Faith he pleaseth, let every man be left to his own judgement.’

‘Particularly, Liberty of Opinion or Judgment is not to be granted, or indulged, in such things as are in­jurious to God, and Destructive to the Souls of men; nor wherein the Difference of judgement and Opinion will necessarily and unavoidably, ex natura rei, produce a Rent and Schisme in the Church of Christ. 1 Cor. 1. 10. Now I beseech you Brethren, by the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that [Page 45] there be no Divisions among you, but that ye be perfectly joyned together in the same mind, and in the same judge­ment. Rom. 10. 17. I beseech you Brethren mark them that cause Divisions and Offences among you, contrary to the Doctrine that you have received, and—what? Tol­lerate them? no, avoid them. Gal. 5. 12. I would they were even cut off that trouble you. Nothing can be clearer then these Scriptures are, against the Toleration of all Do­ctrines, and particularly of those that Trouble, Rend, Di­vide the Church.’

P. 18. ‘But (to speak a little to the Positive) if there be a Latitude, and a Liberty of judgment left, it is first in such things as are not clearly and Positively laid down in Scri­pture, and therefore are not of the Fundamentalls, and and essentialls of Faith and Worship; for there is for these, clear and undoubted Light of Scripture.’

‘Secondly, it is in things that are of private and single practice, and not of open converse, or Church-fellowship and Communion. And yet even in these things, this Li­berty is not to be assumed, at least, not to be practised without much tenderness and circumspection.’

‘First, care must be had of keeping those Opinions wherein we differ from others, private to our selves, not troubling or perplexing the Consciences of others with them. This is the injunction. Rom. 14. 22. Hast thou Faith? have it to thy selfe before God. The Faith there spoken of, is a particular perswasion, touching the free use of all Creatures, and the Liberty of all dayes. And this Faith, this Perswasion was according to the Truth (as is clear by the Apostles Argumentation in that Chap­ter) yet saith the Apostle, Hast thou Faith? have it to thy self before God: do not say, I am fully perswaded of [Page 46] my Liberty, and therefore I ought to profess it, and hold it out in my practice, whatever become of others; it is the truth of God, and I must hold it forth: No saith the Apostle, have it to thy self. And if a man who hath a private opinion in re media, must keep it to himself, though it be a truth, much more must they whose opi­nions are false and erroneous. Certainly there is scarce any difference of judgement so small, and in it self inconside­rable, but the divulging and Propagating of it may prove very dangerous and Pernitious, and in the event intolle­rable.’

‘Suppose a man should be of this Opinion, that it is unlawfull to eat things strangled, or blood: if such a man keep his opinion to himself, and make it a rule only to his own practice: let him enjoy it 'till he can be other­wise informed, and perswaded in his Conscience. But if he will now go publish this Opinion, and intangle the Consciences of others, and seek to draw disciples after him, and make a party, and cause Division and Dissenti­on amongst the People of God, this is not to be tolera­ted.’

‘Private Persons of a differing judgement, if they live quietly, frequent the publick Assemblies of Worship, and are not discerned to disturb the Peace either of State or Church, by any secret underminings, are to be tolle­rated, in hope of their Conversion, and for publick Peace sake. But if these men shall begin to spread their Errors in publick, to inveagle and draw others to them, to be­guile the simple, and so to trouble the publick Peace, they are to be restrained.’

‘P. 21. Had all that profess the Gospel in England, made Conscience to be of the same mind, and the same judge­ment [Page 47] with their Brethren and the rest of the Churches of Christ, as far as possibly; and where they cannot, where there is a necessity of differing, had they made Conscience to keepe their diffences from appearing in Publick, to have their private opinions and faith to themselves and not intangle the weake with their doubt­full Disputations; forbeareing to judge or despise those that are not of their opinion, loving them still as Brethren, not censuring them as Profane, Antichristian, fighters against God, men that will willfully shut their eyes a­gainst the Light; had these things (I say) beene attended to on all hands, our breaches had never beene so great as now they are, nor should the lovers of truth and Peace have had so much cause to lament them.’

P. 40 ‘But where is the fault you will say? True it is there are divisions, sad divisions, danger threatening divisions a­mong us, but where is the fault? I know there are many that lay all the fault upon those whom they call Presby­terians, and say it is their rigour, and their pride and am­bition, their Spirit of Domination that is the cause of all these divisions; Thus say the Antinomians, and thus the Separatists, and thus the Anabaptists, and thus the o­thers say. Now the Lord judge between us and them, and let his people that hear judge this day.’

‘Who are they that divide in judgement from all the Reformed Churches of Christ in the world, that have Opinions and judgements differing from the Opinions & judgements of all the Reformed Churches? we or the Anabaptists? we or the Separatists, we or the—? Possi­bly they will all say, they are of the same Opinion with the Reformed Churches in fundamentalls, as well as we, and their differences, are but in minutioribus. Now sup­posing [Page 48] this to be true (as it may be in some of them) why then do they transgresse the Apostles rule? why do they not if that it be in matters of lesser moment wherein they differ from us, why do not they keep their opinions private, and have their saith unto themselves before God? why do they upon so small differences (if the differences be so small) withdraw from Communion with us and the rest of the Churches, and gather themselves into distinct and separate Churches?—their holding one head & one faith, doth not excuse them from being guilty of breach of Unity and downright Schisme, so long as they hold not one body, one baptisme. [...] sive [...] Beza annot. in 1 Cor. 1. 10. est cum alii aliis &c. Schisme or division (saith he) is this; When men are so addicted to some men, or to some out­ward rites, that though they do agree in the cheif points of Religion, yet they are estranged in their minds, and engage themselves into parties and factions. Now who are they that though they professe to agree with us in Doctrine have yet made a secession, withdrawne them­selves gathered Churches, engaged Parties? Consider and give sentence.’

‘Who are they that have most broken the band of Love? There is great fear what the Presbyterians will do if once they get power into their hands; but in the meane time what do others? who are they that brand their Bre­thren with the Title, Proud, Time-servers, Prelatical, Ty­rannical, Antichristian? And what is this lesse then Persecution.’

‘Who are they that haue been farthest from conde­scending to their Brethren for peace and union sake? were it fit, I could say something of this, yea much: I could tell you much hath beene yeelded and much more [Page 49] would be yeelded, yea almost any thing, but that one thing that would lay a foundation of perpetuall Division and dis-union in Families, Church, Kingdome? Who are they that profess an utter impossibility of reconciliation or union, and plead for nothing but Toleration, Toleration, and some for Toleration in the utmost Latitude, to Papists, Jews, Turks, the very artifice whereby the Arminians in Holland sought to gain a party, and strength unto them­selves? Resolve these Questions, and they will resolve you who are most guilty of these Divisions.’

M. Rich: Vines Ser. before the Com: Mar: 10. 1646. Lond. print. for Abel Roper. 1647 p. 1. ‘By a Declaration set forth above Thirty years agoe, King James (of Famous memory) was pleased to let the World know, not only how ill he resented, and how much he detested the Vorstian, and Arminian Doctrines, then newly born and in their swadling-cloaths; but al­so how sollicitously he interposed with the States Ge­nerall of the United Provinces, against their admittance of Vorstius into the place of Divinity Professor of Leiden, or into their Country. And that he might decline the envy of being in alienâ Republicâ curiosus, he bears him­self upon that common rule, Paries cum Proximus ardet, when a Neighbours house is on fire, it concerns all in the Neighbour-hood to look about them. This Vigilancy con­demnes our (I know not what to call it, I wish no worse might be said then) insensibleness and security. For what were those sparkes at that time smoaking in a re­mote corner, in comparison of that fire which now flames forth at every corner of our house, blown up by that [...], or liberty of all Religions, which may be just­ly called, the Golden Calfe of these times, whereunto many are not unwilling to contribute their strength & Po­licy, and whose Birth-day, they would not fear to call fe­stum [Page 50] Jehovae, an acceptable day unto the Lord. Are not the errors which are rife amongst us, either by infecting Persons of Place and Quality, grown into that boldnes? or by carrying away Barnabas also, crept into that cre­dit? or by spreading far and wide, risen to that strength? that they do face, if not seem able to put into danger of rowting, our common Faith, Publick Worship, authori­zed Ministry, long and much expected, and promised Reformation. This to the common Enemy, is the Cape of good hope; the sound part are afraid, least the Truth should come to beg for poor quarter, and be led Cap­tive, following the Chariot of triumphant Liberty. Some think that Episcopacy in his Pontificalibus, may by this means be retrived, and recalled from exile, to which it was sentenced by the Covenant. Many that are as distant in their Opinions as the two Poles, yet moving upon one axeltree, or tyed together by the tayles of common Interest, doubt not but by laying their stocks together they shall be able to bid fair for a Toleration.’

‘And that we might not be left alone to wonder at our selves, our sympathizing Brethren abroad do wonder also, That we should be made the common Sewre to receive the Garbage of other Churches, and that their stinking snuffes should be allowed Candlesticks here in Eng­land.’

‘In this sad Posture of things, all mens eyes have been upon the Parliament, and every one saith, Is there no Balme in Gilead? Is there no Physitian there? Why then is not the health of the Daughter of my People recove­red?’

M. Simeon Ash Serm. before the Lords Feb. 26. 1644. Lond. print­ed for Edw. Brewster 1645. p. 32. ‘Endeavour vigorously to compound our Differences in Ecclesiasticall concernments. Alas, alas, my heart [Page 51] akes, because of our breaches. Let mine eyes run down with tears night and day, and let them not cease, for the Virgin Daughter of my People is broken with a great breach, with a very grievous blow, Jer. 14. 17. What Factions and Fractions, what Schismes and Sepatations, what Rents and Divisions are in this poor, distracted, Distressed Church of England? how should either King­dome or Church divided stand? God forbid, but tender respect should be had to tender Consciences. But (Right Ho­nourable) I beseech you take heed, least under that pretext, you think of Tolerating all Religions amongst us. Such Liber­ty (I am afraid) would usher in Libertinisme, and hasten our desolation.’

Mr. James Cranford Serm. before the L. Mayor Feb. 1. 1645 Lond. print­ed for Char: Greene 1646. p. 11. & 12. ‘It is commonly replied in Pulpits, in Presses, That a Toleration of all consciences, even Antichristian, would be a Soveraign remedy to cure all dissentions, and an ef­fectuall means to compose the Wars of Christendome: all the blood that hath for so many years been shed, is charged upon the restraint of this licentiousness, ignorantly or malitiously termed Persecution.’

‘I answer, it is besides my purpose to discuss this question of Toleration, only for the present I enquire, First; Would these men that so hotly defend it, grant that Toleration (if they had power in their hands) to others which they desire for themselves? I doubt it. The Arri­ans did sometimes seem as earnest enemies to Persecuti­on as these men; yet when they had Authority on their side, they raised Persecution against the Orthodox, more terri­ble then the heathen Emperours against the Christians, which the Churches of the East most grievously Binii Tom. 1 conc. p. 686. com­plained of.’

‘Athanasius at large describeth, and having spoken [Page 52] much of their inhumane, and more then belluine cru­elty against all Sexes, all Ages, both living and dead, con­cludes,Epist. ad Solitar. that he had said less then their inhumanity was, because it exceeded all expression.’

‘The Donatists did ordinarily plead for Toleration, and seemed the most inveterate enemies to all disturbance for Conscience sake; yet when under the Apostate Julian they had gotten power, who can declare (saith Con. lit. Petil: l. 2. c. 82. Austin) what havock they made of the Orthodox? Opt. cont. Parm. l. 2. 3. All Africa was filled with blood and desolation; Men were rent, Ma­trons dragged, Infants slaughtred, Women with child miscarried, none were secure in their houses, the wayes were not safe for Travelers; the Letters of them that boasted to be the Captains of the Saints were ter­rible to all. Are our men led by another Spirit? Sure I am, that one of them, that with most earnestness, or impudence pleads for Toleration, was lately of another mind in the case of Familists and Antinomians in New-England.’

P. 13. ‘Secondly would such Toleration, conduce to the esta­blishing of Peace in the Common-wealth? hath it ever done it? Possible it is, that the equality of Powers may perswade each Party for a Season to suppress their inward rancour; can Toleration take it away, so that it shall not break out upon sensible advantages by the increase of strength? let the experience of former Ages, and present times’ teach this.

‘Errour may Tolerate errour, saevis inter se convenit urfis, but can darkness agree with light? or Wolves with Sheep? De prae­scrip. cont. Haeret. c. 41. Tertullian observes concerning Hereticks of old, they a­greed well enough one with another; for though they dif­fered in private opinions, yet they joyned in one, in the [Page 53] opposing of Truth. You Persecute (saith Austin of theP. 14. Donatists) where you are able; where you Persecute not, you are not able to doe it, restrained by the fear of Laws, or envie, or the multitude making resistance.’

‘I have been long upon this poynt; but I will conclude it, with that solemn Embassie, which the Orthodox Fa­thers, Assembled in Councell at Sirmium, sent to the Emperour Constantius. I have insisted the longer, Athan. de Syn. Arim. & Sele [...]. that it might appear to all, that the Toleration of Errour, is not a way to Peace, as some men pretend, but to disor­der and confusion: And yet I am not an enemy to Peace, but a friend to Truth, and Holiness, without which no Man shall see God.’

A seriou [...] & passionate Admonition to the Cler­gy; in the words of M. Tho. Ed­wards in his Gangra [...]: part. 1. p. 84 Lond. print. for Ralph Smith at the bible in Cornh [...]ll 1646. ‘Ministers ought now to be intent to the errours of the times, both in Doctrine and Practise, and observe what is the proper work of the day, and Preach accordingly, taking heed of being guilty of sinfull silence, whilest Christ and his truth suffers. We have too many wounds with which we have been wounded, in the house of our friends: many Ministers have and doe undoe us; some by their totall silence; others by speaking too favourably of the Sects, and too much daubing; 'tis high time now to speak out, when the truth of God, the Faith once delivered to the Saints, more pretious then our lives, is almost lost, three Kingdomes almost ruin'd, and all the reformed Churches in their Truth and Peace hazarded. They that can now be silent, well contented, and let the Wolves come freely and not barke, they deserve to be accounted dumb dogs. Let therefore, all Go [...]ly Ortho­dox Ministers, who would not have all run to ruine, stir up themselves, and lift up their voices like Trumpets, stand no longer looking on, as idle spectators, or halting [Page 54] between two; for he that is not now with God in his cause is against him, and he that gathereth not scatter­eth—And that Ministers in our times may be a means to prevent and suppresse the Errours, Heresies and Schismes, they must not onely often preach against them, but they should set themselves against all the ways by which Errours are come in, and are farther comeing up­on us, and oppose them by Preaching & writing; as Lay­mens Preaching, the Gathering of Churches, and above all a Toleration, for that would be an open doore, at which all kind of Heresies would come in, and no man could keep them out: and therefore if Ministers will witnesse for Truth and against Errors, they must set themselves in a speciall manner against a Toleration, as the principall inlet to all Heresie and Error; And if a Toleration be granted all preaching will not keep them out: For as it hath been answered the Patrons of Images, (who plead let them stand, but Preach against the VVorshipping of them) that if they stand, preaching will not take away all the danger; tis not sufficient to keep the People from all Idolatry; so say I in this case. If a Toleration be granted, the Devill will be too hard for us, though we preach never so much against them. A Toleration will undoe all. First bring in Sceptisme in Doctrine, and loosenes of Life, and afterwards all Atheisme.’

‘The Patrons of Error, because they cannot at first plead for such and such Doctrines in terminis, and yet hold them, and would have them propagated, therefore they plead for a Toleration, which once being granted they will come in then of course. O let the Ministers there­fore oppose Toleration, (as being that by which the Di­vel would at once lay a foundation for his Kingdom to all [Page 55] Generations) witnesse against it in all places, possesse the Magistrate of the Evill of it, yea, and the People too, shewing them how if a Toleration were granted, they should never have peace in their Familes more, or ever after have command of VVives, Children, Servants, but they and their Posterities after them are like to live in discontent, and unquietnesse of mind all their dayes.—p. 87. I might shew how the Pastors of the Reformed Churches (namely those who were stars of the First Magnitude) were against the Toleration of Anabaptists, Libertines, and other Sectaries in their time, and what they did and writ against it; as Calvin, Zuinglius, Peter Martyr, Philip Melancthon, Zanchius, Beza, Knox, Bullinger, Musculus,—p. 88. As also how in England in Queen Elizabeths dayes, learned Bishops and Godly Ministers were against the suffering of many Religions in this Kingdome: as Bishop Jewel, Bishop Babington, Bishop Bilson, Mr. Cartwright, & Mr. Perkins, who in his learned workes on Revel: 2. 20. speakes thus; Every man is not to be left to his own Conscience; to teach and hold what Doctrine he will▪ But all such men or women as teach erroneous Doctrine, by the Government of the Church are to be restrained.—p. 91. Did I say the Arch-Bishops, Bishops, Deanes, Doctors, Court-Chaplains, and Bishops-Chaplains, (for there were some of all these sorts oppos'd) hazard the favour of King, Nobles, great Courtiers, the losse of all their Pre­ferments, Arch-Bishopricks, Bishopricks, Deaneries, great liveings to withstand a Toleration; And shall the Ministers of our times suffer a Toleration of all Sects to come in upon us, in a time when the greatest Reformation is pre­tended that ever was in this Kingdome, and a Parliament fitting, and be either wholly silent or oppose saintly; be [Page 56] afraid of displeasing some great man, or hazarding a lit­tle estate and liberty? was the Lukewarme Angel whom God hath cast out of his Church, for not being zealous enough, yet so zealous as to hazard all against a Tolera­tion of Popery? And shall the Presbyterians Orthodox Godly Ministers be so cold as to let Anabaptism, Brownisme, Antinomianisme, Libertinisme, Independency, come in upon us, and keep in a whole Skin? Certain­ly the Bishops and their Chaplains shall rise up in judg­ment against the Ministry of this Generation, who ap­peared against the mind of the King, Council, and so powerfull a faction as was for Popery, and the Toleration of it in those dayes, if they be silent or meally mouthed, besides the shame and dishonour of it here, before the Churches abroad, and good men at home, who will lay all the blame upon the Ministers, and say, Wee may thanke them for this, for dealing no more freely, nor faithfully with the Kingdom, crying out, an unworthy A­ssembly, an unworthy Ministry in City and Country, to sit still and suffer all these Errors and poysonous Prin­ciples, in Books, Sermons to come in upon us, and to passe unquestioned.’

‘O for some Gabriel Powells, D [...]wnams, Abbots &c:O for a Burgesse, a Calamy, a Case, a Baxter, an Edwards &c. to write Preach, &c. to write, preach, remonstrate, protest against the Errors and wayes of these times. Tis want of courage and speak­ing out hath undone us; and 'tis onely boldnesse and freedome in speakeing, to declare particularly such books come forth, such Sermons preached, such practices plaid, such persons preferred and suffered, such partiality used &c: in reference to the Sectaries, that must reco­ver us; theres no way to put a stop to things, and save all from ruine, but present courage and Heroick resolution, [Page 57] and lets speak out, and suffer no longer a company of giddy cunning self-seeking Sectaries, to betray the Truth of God, and to abuse and undoe two Kingdoms—Lets therefore fill all Presses, cause all Pulpits to ring, and so possess Par­liament, City, and whole Kingdom against the Sects, and of the evill of Schisme, and a Toleration, that we may no more hear of a Toleration, nor of Seperated Churches, being hatefull names in the Church of God. AMEN AMEN.’

An Addi­tionall Te­stimony of M. Nath: Newcomen Serm. at Pauls Feb. 8. 1645. p. 12. ‘For if it be lawfull for every man to entertain and hold what opinion he pleaseth, how differing soever from the opinion and judgment of the rest of the Church and Peo­ple of God, yet this is his opinion, and his judgement is perswaded of it, and he must follow his own judgement, and this liberty of judgement be (as some say) Liberty of Conscience, part of the Liberty purchased by Jesus, and to restrain it, or set bounds to it, is in their language Per­secution, Tyranny, &c. If this were true, sure Paul did ve­ry ill, to charge the Corinthians with so much authority, to be of the same mind, and of the same judgment. Might not some among the Corinthians have said to Paul, This is hard usage, this is to rack a low man to the same length with a taller, and to cut a tall man to the stature of one that is low? What, the same judgement? and the same minde? will not Paul allow difference of lights and sights? Might not some one among the Corinthians have said, What if I am of o­pinion that there is no resurrection, what hath Paul or a­ny man to do with that? it is my conscience, and it is my liberty, and what hath any man to do with my conscience more then I with his? might nor Hymaeneus have said; What if it be my Opinion, that the Resurrection is past al­ready, what hath Paul to do with that? Yes, saith Paul, [Page 58] if ye persist obstinate I will Excommunicate you, I will deliver you up to Satan, that you may learn not to Blaspheme: Certainly this shelter, this Asylum of errour, falsely called Liberty of Conscience, was not thought of in former times.’

THus far these Famous Divines, whose ve­ry words I have transcribed, and that faith­fully, never adding so much as one syllable of my own, unless in the Margin, where I have some­times taken a little Liberty.

I do much hope (upon a serious perusall) you will confess these Testimonies both pertinent and convincing, and therefore I might here take occasion to consult my own ease, and your pa­tience. But because (as I have found by sad ex­perience) Prejudices are strong, and evil Habits (which have been long in contracting) are not suddainly removed, (as an effectual meanes (through Gods blessing) of your farther Convi­ction) I shall intreat your perusall of these fol­lowing Authorities.

A LETTER OF THE Presbyterian Ministers in the City OF LONDON, Presented the First of Jan. 1645. to the Reverend Assembly of DIVINES, Sitting at Westminster by Authority of Parliament AGAINST Toleration.
[Page] [Page 61] To Our Reverend, Learned, and Religious Bre­thren, the Prolocutor, and the rest of the Di­vines Assembled, and now sitting at Westmin­ster, by Authority of Parliament: These pre­sent.

Reverend and beloved Brethren,

WE are exceedingly apprehensive of the ‘de­sirableness of our Churches Peace, and of the pleasantness of Brethrens Unity, know­ing that when Peace is set upon its proper Basis, viz: Righteousnesse and truth, it is one of the best Possessions, both delectable and profitable: like Aa­ron, ointment, and the dew of Hermon. It is true, by reason of different lights, and different sights among Brethren there may be dissenting in Opinion; yet, What is the keeping conventicles or private meetings but separa­ting from our Church communion. why should there be any separating from Church-Communion? The Churches Coat may be of diverse colours, yet, why should there be any rent in it? Have we not a Touch-stone of Truth, the good word of God; and when all things are examined by that word, then that which is best may be held fast; but first they must be known, and then examined afterward. If our dissenting Brethren after so many importunate in­treaties would have been perswaded (either in zeale to the truth, or in sincere love to the Churches peace, and u­nity [Page 62] among Brethren, or in respect to their own reputa­tion by faire and ingenious dealing, or Yet the Ministers of this perswa­sion made as little con­science of their Sub­scriptions, Promises, yea▪ Oaths of Canonicall Obedience to their re­spective Diocesans. in Conscience to their promise made with the Ministers of London now five years since, or any such like reasonable consideration) at last to have given us a full narrative of their Opinions, and Grounds of their Separation, we are perswaded they would not have stood at such a distance from us as now they do: But they chose rather to walk by their own private lights than to unbosome themselves to us their most affectionate Brethren; and to set themselves in an untroden way of their own, rather then to wait what our Covenanted Reformation, according to the word of God, and Shew us the example of one refor­med Church which al­loweth her Ministers liberty not to use her esta­blishd Rites and Cere­monies. examples of the best reformed Churches would bring forth. But the offence doth not end here, it is much that our Brethren should separate from the Church, but that they should endeavour This is plainly our Brethrens designe and endeavour at this time. to get a warrant to Autho­rize their Separation from it, and to have Liberty (by draw­ing members out of it) to weaken and diminish it, till (so far as lies in them) they have brought it to nothing; this we think to be plainly unlawfull, yet this we understand is their present designe and endeavour. Wherefore (Reverend Brethren) having had such large experience of your zeale of Gods glory, your care of his afflicted Church, your earnest endeavours to promote the compleat Reformation of it, and of your ready concurrence with us in the improve­ment of any means that might be found conducible to this end; we are bold to hint unto you these our ensuing Reasons against the Toleration of Independency in this Church.’

1. ‘The desires and endeavours of Independents for a Toleration, are at this time extreamly unseasonable and preproperous: for,’

[Page 63]1. ‘The Reformation of Religion is not yet perfected and setled amongst us, according to our Covenant. And why may not the Reformation be raised up at last, to such purity, and perfection, that truly tender Conscien­ces may receive abundant satisfaction, for ought that yet appears?’

2. ‘It is not yet known, what the Government of the Independents is, neither would they ever yet vouchsafe to let the World know, what they hold in that point, though some of their Party have been too forward to challenge the London Petitioners, as led with blind Obedi­ence, and pinning their soules upon the Priests sleeve, for de­siring an establishment of the Government of Christ, be­fore there was any Modell of it extant.’

3. ‘We can hardly be perswaded, that the Indepen­dents themselves (after all the stirs they have made a­mongst us) The Presbyterians (although often pressed thereunto) will not de­clare where­with they would be all concluded, how far they mean to goe, and where to stay in their desires of Tolerati­on, and con­descention. are as yet fully resolved about their own way, wherewith they would be concluded, seeing they pub­lish not their modell (though they are nimble enough in publishing other things) and they profess Reserves, and new Lights, for which they will (no doubt) expect the like Toleration, and so in infinitum. It were more seasonable to move for Toleration, when once they are positively determined how far they mean to goe, and where they mean to stay.’

II. ‘Their desires and endeavours, are unreasonable, and unequall in divers regards.’

1. ‘Partly because no such Toleration, hath hitherto been established (so far as we know) in any Christian State by the Civil Magistrate.’

2. It's noto­rious Pres­bytery would not in the late times tole­rate Epis­copacy. ‘Partly, because some of them have solemnly pro­fest, that they cannot suffer Presbytery; and answerable here­unto [Page 64] is their practise in those places where Independency pre­vailes.’

3 ‘And partly because To grant indulgence unto a few, would offend many more of all Par­ties. Why may not Indepen­dents, and all other Se­ctaries, de­sire the same favour, in case they provide Readers or Churches. to grant to them, and not to other Sectaries, who are free borne as well as they, and have done as good service as they to the Publick (as they use to plead) will be counted injustice and great Partiality; but to grant it unto all, will scarce be clear'd from great impie­ty.’

III. ‘Independency is a Schisme’

1. Ye al­ready do, & (in case your Toleration be granted) will draw our members from our Congrega­tions, which ye acknowledge true Churches. ‘Independents do depart from our Churches and so acknowledg'd by themselves.’

2. ‘They draw and seduce our members from our Con­gregations.’

3. Ye do in effect set up Separate Churches.▪ They erect separate Congregations, under a separate ‘and undiscovered Government.’

Ye receive not the Sacraments (except some few) in our Churches but [...] private meetings, ‘They refuse Communion with our Churches in the Sacraments.’

5. ‘Their Ministers refuse to preach among us as Of­ficers.’

6. ‘Their members, if at any time they joyne with us in hearing the Word and Prayer, yet they do it not as with the Ministeriall Word and Prayer, nor as the Acts of Church Communion’

No Schisme is to be Tolerated▪ as ye grant. But Presbytery is a Schisme Now, as much as Independency w [...] by you declared to be Then. Therefore, (according to your own grounds) it [...] not to be Tolerated. Now we judge that no Schisme is to be ‘Tolera­ted in the Church Schismes. [...] 1 Cor: 1. 10. 1 Cor: 12. 25. Divisions. [...] Rom: 6. 17. with 1 Cor. 3 3. Gal: 5 20.’

IV. The same would follow if Presbytery were Tolerated. ‘Many mischiefes will inevitably follow upo [...] [Page 65] this Toleration, and that both to Church and Common­wealth.’

First to the Church, as,

1. ‘Causeless and unjust revolts from our Ministry, and Congregations.’

2. ‘Our Peoples minds will be troubled, and in danger to be subverted, as Acts 15. 24.’

3. ‘Bitter heart-burnings among Brethren, will be fo­mented and perpetuated to Posterity.’

4. ‘The Godly, painfull, Orthodox Ministry, will be dis­couraged and despised.’

5, ‘The life and power of Godlinesse will be eaten out by fri­volous disputes, and vaine janglings.’

6. ‘The whole course of Religion in private Families, will be interrupted and undermined.’

7. ‘Reciprocall Duties between persons of nearest and dea­rest Relations will be extreamly violated.’

8. ‘The whole work of Reformation, especially in Disci­pline and Government will be retarded, disturbed, and in danger of being utterly frustrate and void, whilest every per­son shall have liberty, upon every triviall discontent at Pres­byteriall Goverment and Churches, to revolt from us, and list themselves in separated Congregations.’

9. ‘All other Sects and Heresies in the Kingdome will be encouraged to endeavour the like Toleration.’

10. All other Sects and Heresies in the Kingdome will ‘safeguard and shelter themselves under the wings of Indepen­dency, and some of the Independents in their Books, have o­penly avowed, that they plead for Liberty of Conscience as well for others as for themselves.’

11. ‘And the whole Church of England, in short time will be swallowed up with destruction and confusion. And God is [Page 66] not the Author of confusion but of peace. 1. Cor: 14. 33.’

‘Secondly to the Commonwealth. for,’

1. ‘All these mischiefs in the Church will have their pro­portionable influence upon the Commonwealth.’

2. ‘The Kingdome will be wofully weakned by scandalls and Divisions; so that the enemies of it, both domesticall and forreign,’ will be encouraged to plot and practice against it.

3. It is much to be doubted, lest the power of the Magistrate, ‘should not onely be weakened, but even utterly overthrowne, considering the Principles and practices of Independents, toge­ther with their compliance with other Sectaries, sufficiently And are not Presby­tarian prin­ciples known to be so too. knowne to be Anti-Magistraticall.’

And as inconsistent with other Oaths im­posed by Lawfull Authority, which that was not. V. ‘Such a Toleration is utterly repugnant and in­consistent with that solemn League and Covenant, for Reformation and defence of Religion, which not only both houses of Parliament, but also persons of all sorts in both Kingdoms of England and Scotland, have sub­scribed, and with hands lifted up to the most high God have sworn: Which Oaths have been taken by most of the chief sticklers for Toleration, and with a True intention (it was hoped) to performe the same. which Covenant likewise, both you, and we, and those that most earnestly pursue the esta­blishment of Toleration, have made (or should have made) in the presence of Almighty God, the searcher of all hearts, with a true intention to perform the same, as we shall answer at the Great day, when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed. For,’

1. ‘This is opposite to the Reformation of Religion, accord­ing [Page 67] to the word of God, and the example of the best reformed Churches, Article 1.’

2. The Toleration of Presbytery is no less de­structive to the conjun­ction and uniformity of all the three King­domes then Indepen­dency. ‘It is destructive to the three Kingdomes nearest conjunction and uniformity in Religion and Government, which might lead us and our posterity after us as Brethren to live in faith and Love Art. 1.’

3. Seeing Presbytery is as much a Schisme from Epis­copacy, as Episcopacy or indepen­dency was from Pres­bytery, why do they now, in stead of extirpation, desire the Toleration of it, contrary to your Covenant. ‘It is plainly contrary to that extirpation of Schisme and whatsoever shall be found contrary to sound Doctrine, and the Power of Godlinesse, which we have sworne sincerely, really, and constantly to endeavour without respect of per­sons.’

4. Toleration of Schisme rendreth Magistrates and Ministers accessary to the Errours, Sins, and Destruction of seduced and deluded People. ‘Hereby we shall be involved in the guilt of other mens sins, and thereby be endangered to receive of their Plagues Art. 2.’

5. It seems utterly impossible (if such Toleration should be ‘granted) that the Lord should be one, and his name one in the three Kingdomes. Art, 2.’

6. ‘This will palpably hinder the Reformation of Reli­gion, inevitably divide one Kingdome from another, and unhappily make factions and parties among the People con­trary to this League and Covenant; of which evil offi­ces, whosoever shall be found guilty, are reputed in the Words of the Covenant The Tole­ration of deformity, even in little Matters, sometimes causeth factions and par­ties amongst the People. Let Ʋs have a care we be not Incendiaries, or evill Instruments for Sacrilegious spirits to work by ill affected as well to Presbyte­ry as Episcopacy Incendiaries, Malignants [Page 68] Malignants and evill Instruments, to be discovered, that they may be brought to publick triall, and receive condigne punishment. Art. 4. & 5.’

‘These are some of the many Considerations, which make deep impressions upon our spirits, against that great Diana of Independents, and all the Sectaries so much cryed up by them in these distracted times, viz. A Toleration, a Toleration. And however, none should have more rejoyced then our selves in the establishment of a Brotherly, Peaceable, and Christian accommoda­tion; yet this being utterly rejected by them, we can­not dissemble how upon the fore-mentioned grounds, we detest and abhor the much endeavoured Toleration. Our Bowels, our Bowels are stirred within us, and we could even Drowne our selves in Tears, when we call to mind, how long, and sharp a travell this Kingdom hath been in for many years together, to bring forth that blessed fruit of a pure and perfect Reformation; and now at last after all our pangs, and dolours, and expecta­tions, this Reall and through Reformation, is in danger of being strangled in the Birth, by a lawless Toleration, that strives to be brought forth before it.’

‘Wherefore (Reverend and Beloved Brethren) we could not satisfy our selves, till we had made some dis­covery of our Thoughts unto you about this matter; not that we can harbour the least jealousy of your zeale, fi­delity, or industry in the opposing, and extirpating of such a root of gall and bitterness, as Toleration is and will be, both in present and future Ages; but that we may what lies in us, endeavour mutually to strengthen one anothers resolutions, against the present growing e­vills, [Page 69] and that our Consciences, may not smite us ano­ther day for sinfull silence, or sluggish deficiency in any point of Duty, tending to the glory of Christ, Honour of the Truth, Peace of the Church, Perfection of Refor­mation, Performance of our Covenant, and Benefit of present and succeeding Generations.’

From Sion-Colledge Lond. Decemb. 18. 1645.

Subscribed by Us your Affectionate Brethren, and Fellow-labou­rers in the work of the Mini­stry, to whom Truth and Peace is very pretious.

The Judgement of King JAMES and His Privy-Council against Toleration.
Transcribed verbatim out of Judge Crooks Reports. Term. Mich: Anno 2. Jacobi Parag. 13. Part. 2. p. 37.

MEmorandum, that by command from the King, ‘all the Justices of England, with diverse of the Nobility viz. The Lord Ellesmere Lord Chancelor, the Earle of Dorset Lord Trea­surer, Vicount Cranbourne Principall Secretary, the Earle of Nottingham Lord Admirall, the Earles of Northumberland, Worcester, Devon, and Northampton, the Lords Zouch, Burghley, and Knowles, the Chancel­lor of the Dutchy, the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, the Bishop of London, Popham chief Justice, Bruce Master of the Rolls, Anderson, Gawdy, Walmesly, Fenner, Kings­mill, Warberton, Savill, Daniell, Yelverton, and Snigg, were assembled in the Star Chamber; where the Lord Chancellor, after a long Speech made by him, concern­ing Justices of Peace, and his Exhortation to the Justices of Assize; and in discourse concerning Papists and Puri­tans, [Page 72] Declaring how they both were disturbers of the State, and that the King intended to suppress them, and to have the Laws put in execution against them, Deman­ded of the Justices their Resolution in three things.’

‘First, Whether the Deprivation of Puritan Mini­sters by the High Commissioners, for refusing to Con­forme themselves to the Ceremonies appointed by the last Canons, was Lawfull? Whereto all the Justices answered.’

‘That they had conferred thereof before, and held it to be lawfull, Because the King hath the Supream Eccle­siasticall Power, which he hath Delegated to the Com­missioners, whereby they had the Power of Deprivation, by the Canon Law of the Realm, and the Statute of 1. Eliz. which appoints Commissioners to be made by the Queen, doth not confer any new Power, but explain and declare the ancient Power. And therefore they held it clear, That the King without Parliament might make Orders and Constitutions for the Government of the Clergy, and might deprive them, if they obeyed not; And so the Commissioners might deprive them. But they could not make any Constitutions without the King, and the divulging of such Ordinances by Proclamation is a most gratious Admonition; And for as much as they have refused to obey, they are lawfully deprived by the Commissioners ex Officio without Libell Et ore tenus convocati.’

‘Secondly, Whether a Prohibition be grantable against the Commissioners upon the Statute of 2. H. 5. if they do not deliver the Copy of the Libell to the Party; whereto they all Answered, That that Statute is intended where the Ecclesiasticall Judge proceeds, Ex officio & ore tenus.’

‘Thirdly, Whether it were an offence punishable, and what punishment they deserved, who framed Petitions, and collected a multitude of hands thereto, to prefer the King in a publick cause as the Puritans had done, with an Intimation to the King, That if he denyed their Suite, many Thousands of the Subjects would be discontented? Whereto all the Justices answered, that it was an of­fence finable at discretion, and very neer to Treason and Felony in the punishment, for they tended to the raising of Sedition, Rebellion and discontent among the People: To which Resolution all the Lords agreed and then many of the Lords declared.’

‘That some of the Puritans had raised a false Rumour of the King, how he intended to grant a Toleration to Pa­pists: which offence the Justices conceived to be heinous­ly finable by the Rules of the Common Law, either in the Kings Bench, or by the King and his Councill: or now since the Statute of 3. H. 7. in the Star-Chamber. And the Lords severally declared how the King was discon­tented, with the said false Rumour, and had made but the day before a Protestation unto them, That he never intended it, and that he would spend the last drop of blood in his body before he would do it; and prayed that before any of his Issue should maintain any other Religi­on then what he truly professed and maintained, that God would take them out of the World.’

VOTES &c. OF THE Honourable House of COMMONS Feb. 5. &c. 1662. Upon Reading His Majesties Gratious Declaration and Speech &c.

Die Mercurii 25. Feb. 15. Car. R.

Resolved &c. Nemine contradicente, That the humble Thanks of this House, be returned to His Majesty, for his Resolution to Maintain the Act of Vnifor­mity.

Resolved &c.

That it be presented to the Kings Majesty, as the Humble Advice of the House, That no Indulgence be granted to the dissenters from the Act of Vniformity.

Most Gratious Soveraigne,

THe Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, of the Commons house of Parliament, did with great joy receive your Maje­sties [Page 76] ‘most Gratious Speech, at the opening this Session of Par­liament: And being thereby invited to consider of their Declaration of the Twenty sixth of December last; they have with all Sobriety, Duty, and Affection, examined the grounds thereof, and do by me present unto your Ma­jesty their most hearty Thanks for the same, and humble Advice thereupon; both which, I do beseech your Ma­jesty, that you will vouchsafe me to deliver in their own words.’

‘May it please your most excellent Majesty,’

‘Wee your Majesties most Dutifull and Loyall Sub­jects, the Knights, Citizens and Burgesses of the House of Commons in Parliament Assembled, having with all fi­delity and obedience considered of the severall matters comprized in your Majesties late Gratious Declaration of the 26 of Decemb. last, and your most gratious Speech at the beginning of this present Session,’

‘Do in the first place for our selves, and in the names of all the Commons of England, render to your Sacred Majesty, the Tribute of our most hearty Thanks for that infinite Grace and Goodness, wherewith your Majesty hath been pleased to publish your Royall intentions, of adhering to your Act of Indempnity and Oblivion, by a constant and Religious observance of it. And our hearts are further enlarged in these returnes of Thansgivings when we consider your Majesties most Princely, and Heroick Professions of relying upon the Affections of your people, and abhorring all sort of mi­litary and arbitrary Rule. But above all wee can never enough remember, to the honour of your Majesties Pi­ety, and our unspeakable Comfort, those solemne and endearing Invitations of us your Majesties Subjects [Page 77] to prepare Lawes to be presented to your Majesty, a­gainst the growth and encrease of Popery; and withall to provide more Laws against Licentiousness and impiety, at the same time declaring your own Resolutions for main­taining the Act of Uniformity.’

‘And it becomes us alwaies to acknowledge and ad­mire your Majesties Wisdome in this your Declaration, whereby your Majesty is pleased to resolve, not only by sumptuary Laws, but by your own Royall example of frugality, to restrain that excess in mens expences, which is grown so generall, and so exorbitant; and to direct our endeavours, to find out fit, & proper Laws for advance­ment of Trade and Commerce.’

‘After all this we most humbly beseech your Majesty to believe, That it is with extream unwillingness and re­luctancy of heart, that we are brought to differ from any thing which your Majesty hath thought fit to propose; And though we do no way doubt, but that the unreaso­nable distempers of mens spirits, and the many Muti­nies and Conspiracies which were carried on, during the late intervalls of Parliament, did reasonably incline your Majesty to endeavour by your declaration, to give some allay to those ill humours, till the Parliament Assem­bled and the hopes of indulgence, if the Parliament should consent to it, especially seeing the pretenders to this indulgence, did seem to make some titles to it, by vertue of your Majesties Declaration from Breda. Ne­vertheless, we your Majesties most Dutifull and Loyall Subjects, who are now returned to serve in Parliament from those severall parts and places of your Kingdome, for which we are chosen, Do humbly offer to your Ma­jesties great VVisdome, That it is in no sort advisable, [Page 78] that there be any indulgence to such persons, who pre­sume to dissent from the Act of Uniformity, and the Re­ligion established.’

For these Reasons,

‘We have considered the Nature of your Majesties Declaration from Breda, and are humbly of Opinion, That your Majesty ought not to be pressed with it any farther,’

‘Because it is not a promise in it self, but only a Gra­tious Declaration of your Majesties Intentions, to doe what in you lay, and what a Parliament should advise your Majesty to doe; and no such Advice was ever gi­ven, or thought fit to be offered; nor could it be other­wise understood, because there were Laws of Uniformi­ty then in being, which could not be dispensed with, but by Act of Parliament.’

‘They who do pretend a right to that supposed promise, put the Right into the hands of their Representatives, whom they chose to serve for them in this Parliament, who have passed, and your Majesty consented to the Act of Uniformity. If any shall presume to say, that a right to the benefit of this Declaration doth still remain after this Act passed,’

‘It tends to dissolve the very Bonds of Goverment, and to suppose a disability in your Majesty and the Houses of Parliament to make a Law contrary to any part of your Majesties Declaration, though both Houses should advise your Majesty to it.’

‘We have also considered the nature of the Indulgence proposed, with reference to those consequences, which must necessarily attend it.’

‘It will establish Schisme by a Law, and make the [Page 79] whole Goverment of the Church precarious, and the Censures of it of no moment or Consideration at all.’

‘It will no way become the Gravity or Wisdome of a Parliament, to passe a Law at one Session for Uniformity, and at the next Session (the Reasons of Uniformity con­tinuing still the same) to passe another Law to frustrate or weaken the execution of it.’

‘It will expose your Majesty to the restlesse importuni­ty of every Sect or Opinion, and of every single Person also, who shall presume to dissent from the Church of England.’

‘It will be a cause of increasing Sects and Sectaries, whose numbers will weaken the true Protestant Professi­on so far, that it will at least be difficult for it, to defend it self against them: And which is yet farther Considera­ble, those Numbers which by being troublesome to the Government, find they can arrive to an Indulgence, will as their Numbers increase, be yet more troublesome, that so at length they may arrive to a generall Toleration, which your Majesty hath declared against, and in time some prevalent Sect, will at last contend for an establish­ment, which for ought can be foreseen, may end in Po­pery.’

‘It is a thing altogether without precedent, and will take away all means of Convicting Recusants, and be in­consistent with the Method and proceedings of the Laws of England.’

‘Lastly it is humbly conceived, that the Indulgence pro­pos'd will be so far from tending to the peace of the Kingdom, that it is rather likely to occasion great di­sturbance. And on the contrary; That the asserting of the Lawes, and the Religion establish't, according to the [Page 80] Act of Vniformity, is the most probable means to pro­duce a settled Peace and Obedience throughout your Kingdome: Because the variety of Professions in Reli­gion, when openly divulged, doth directly distinguish men into parties, and withall gives them opportunity to count their numbers; which considering the animosities that out of a Religious Pride will be kept on foot by the seve­rall factions, doth tend directly and inevitably to open disturbance.’

Nor can your Majesty have any Security, that the ‘Do­ctrine or Worship of the severall Factions, which are all governed by a severall Rule, shall be consistent with the Peace of your Kingdome.’

‘And if any persons shall presume to disturb the peace of the Kingdome, We do in all humility declare, That we will for ever, and in all Occasions, be ready with our utmost endeavour and Assistance, to adhere to and serve Your Majesty according to our bounden Duty and Allegiance.’

My Brethren,

I Have now given you my Authorities, viz.

1. The private Testimonies of twenty emi­nent Divines.

2. The publick Testimony of the Presby­terian Ministers in the City of London (Synodi­cally) met at Sion Colledge.

3. The Authority of that Wise, and Learned King James and his Privy Councill.

4. The Votes and Reasons of the Honourable Commons Assembled in this present Parlia­ment.

All which I have designedly ranked in this method, that observing the order of nature, and beginning ab imperfectiori, I might gradually as­cend to that which is more perfect; for such I think the Reasons of the House will be found; (to him that dares attempt them) i. e. Impregnable and unanswerable.

I Know not how it fares with other men, (I am no judge of their honesty or Knowledge) but I am sure, as to me the premises have appeared so con­siderable [Page 82] I should think the world might suspect either my Intellectualls, or Moralls, were I not thus apprehensive of so convincing a Light.

My Brethren, (that I may deal freely with you) I am perfectly amaz'd, and (I had almost said) scandaliz'd; that men so eminent for Learn­ing, so noted for Piety, and (if we may beleive themselves it being one of their grand Topickes for Indulgence) so considerable for Policy, I say, that these men should so warmely concerne them­selves for this Thing call'd Toleration, which (as I hope the premises have evinc'd) is not onely de­structive both to Church & State, but also (which prudent men would a little consider) so direct­ly contrary to their former Principles & Practices.

I am very unwilling to make any unpleasing Reflections, but 'tis the Language of the world (and I am not yet instructed to confute it) that it is not a Toleration, (however pretended, as the most advantageous method, that can at pre­sent be employ'd) but a Reformation, (that is, (as sad experience hath explained it) a totall Ex­tirpation of what ever is contrary to their hu­mours and designes) that each different Partie endeavours to establish.

Now that this may not be rejected as a slan­dering designe, onely to make you odious to Au­thoritie, (as is commonly objected) there are se­verall Reasons (at least strong conjectures) that seeme highly to enforce the formentioned Charge.

I am willing to conclude; and shall therefore give you my notions in grosse, leaving the Analy­sis to your acuter Judgements.

There are you know such things in the world, as a Jus Divinum of some one Forme of Govern­ment, and a Solemne League and Covenant; both which as being directly contrary to your pretended Toleration, (had I but the leysure or ability to improve them) might easily be re­solved into Volume of Arguments.

But leaving this performance (if occasion shall require) to the management of some abler Pen, permit me very calmely to beg your Re­solution to this following Proposall.

Were you in the same Condition, (i. e,) did you enjoy the same encourageing Circumstances, that your Adversaries, the true Sons of the Church of England (through Gods great mercy and the Indulgence of a gratious Prince) are at present favoured with; then lay your hands upon [Page 84] your breasts, and tell me, as in the Presence of the great God that shall judge the world; Whe­ther would you then indulge either Person or Parties, that should dissent from your established Discipline, be it Presbyterian, or Independent, or any other whatsoever: (e. g.) Whether would you then permit that Minister to preach publick­ly, that should read the Service of our Church, weare a Surplisse, use the Crosse in Baptisme, Kneel at the Sacrament, &c: and not onely so, but the ut­most of whose endeavours should be employ'd in perswading others to the like practices, telling them that the contrary (by you observed) was irreverent and undecent, and therefore of all good Christians to be loath'd and abhorr'd, I say tell me plainly; Is it fit to grant a Toleration and In­dulgence to such a Person or no? if not, then (even your selves being judges) neither is it fit to Tole­rate you, since your Principles and Practices are as distant from his (I mean the true Son's of the Church of England) as his from yours, as destru­ctive to his, as his to yours: and it is unreasonable (says the defender of the London Ministers Letter to the Assembly) that Independents should desire that Ant. Tole­rat. p. 16. Toleration from Presbyters, which they would not give [Page 85] to Presbyters; so say I, it is unreasonable that In­dependents, Presbyters, or any other Sect should desire that Toleration from Episcopacy, which they would not grant to Episcopacy. For with what face can I desire a courtesie from him, to whom I do o­penly professe, I would deny the same Courtesie.

But now if you take the other member of the Contradiction, and say, you would tolerate the fore­mention'd Person, supposeing him otherwise of a quiet, and peacable temper; let me then desire you further to resolve me. Are you perswaded, That the Church of England requires any thing Sin­full as the condition of her Communion or not? if you say, shee does not (I am no little troubled to mention it, but theres no evasion) I must plainly tell you, you are no better then downright Schismaticks; for Schisme in the proper notion of it is nothing else, but a causeles Separation from that part of the visible Church of which we were members: now there is no sufficient cause for such Separation but Ʋnless there be something which is sin­full requi­red as the Condition of our Com­munion, it appears to me to be Schisme to withdraw our selves. Def: of Propos. p. 91. Sin; it being the judgement of our best writers upon that Controversie, that nothing else could warrant our Separation from Rome but this; that she required as Conditions of her Communion somewhat in fide erroneous, or in facto impious.

But if you are perswaded (and some of you have declared it) that she does require something which is sinfull, as the Condition of her Communion, then the Case is cleare; the Make falls of; and I have finished my Taske; for, since all Sin is con­fessedly the object, not only of our hatred and aversation, but also of totall extirpation (it being every ones duty not only to avoid Sin himselfe, but (by all lawfull waies and methods) to hinder its Commission in others) I shall humbly leave it to his most sacred Majestie and the Wisdome of the Parliament to Consider;

VVhether it be either Religion, or Policie to tolerate those Persons, or Parties, which are perswaded in their Consciences, that it is a ne­cessarie incumbent Dutie, not onely to hate and detest, but also (by all those waies and methods which they themselves shall think lawfull) to weaken, alter, & extirpate the settled Govern­ment of the Church? the which Alteration, what influence it may have upon the State, and how Destructive it may prove to his Majesties Crown and Kingdomes, (I hope it is no breach of the Act of Oblivion to tell you) the experience of late years hath suggested a very fatall conje­cture.

FINIS.

THE CONTENTS

The Preface.
  • The Author no scoffer at Religion. p. 2.
  • The Occasion of this work. 5.
  • The Author dissatisfied about Toleration. 7.
  • Toleration is unpracticable. 8.
  • The petitioners for Tol: scarce intelligible in their Proposals. 9.
  • The Testimonies of twenty eminent Divines against Tolerati­on. 11.
Particularly.
  • Mr. Ash. 50.
  • Dr. Corn: Burgess. 15.
  • Mr. Baxter. 37.
  • Mr. Calamy. 33.
  • Mr. Case. 28.
  • Mr. Cranford 51.
  • Mr. Edwards. 53.
  • Mr. Good. 23.
  • Mr. Hardwick. 26.
  • Mr. Horton. 39.
  • Mr. Hughes. 32.
  • Mr. Lightfoot. 31.
  • Mr. Newcomen 42.
  • Mr. Reyner. 28.
  • Mr. Salwey. 27.
  • Mr. Seaman. 41.
  • Mr. Thorowgood. 24.
  • Mr. Vines. 49.
  • Mr. Ward, 19.
  • Mr. Watson, 31.
  • A Letter of the Presbyterian Ministers in the City of London to the Assembly, against Toleration. 61.
  • The Judgement of King James and his Privy Councill against Toleration. 71.
  • The Votes and Reasons of this present Parliament against Toleration. 75.
Conclusion.
  • A serious reflection upon the Premises. 81.
  • 'Tis not Tol: but Reformation that N. C. intend. 82.
  • The Reasons which caused the Author so to think. 83.
  • A Proposall which N. C. are desired to resolve. ib.
  • N. C. are Schismaticks. 85.
  • A very humble Address to his Majesty and the Parliament. 86

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. Searching, reading, printing, or downloading EEBO-TCP texts is reserved for the authorized users of these project partner institutions. Permission must be granted for subsequent distribution, in print or electronically, of this EEBO-TCP Phase II text, in whole or in part.