ftition or Idolatry, which has no one Serm. 1. Doctrine or Opinion favouring of either, but exprefly many, nay, all neceffary to impugn and overthrow both; for befides that, 'tis not likely that any Church fhould impofe Rites repugnant to its own Doctrine and Principles: So that if any fuch were to be found amongst us, it were to be charg'd on the Perfonal Corruptions of Men, not the Frame and Conftitution of our Church: Befides this, I fay, 'twill puzzle a very fubtile Schoolman to form a Notion of Superftition and Idolatry in Practice without a Superftitious or Idolatrous Opinion to Found it upon. And thus, I think, I have fufficiently made it out, that the Doctrine of the Church of England is fuch, both as to Matters of Faith and Practice, as can give no just cause of Offence to any, unlefs Socinians, Quakers, Anabaptifts, and fuch kind of Sects, which are not only Condemn'd by all the Reformed Churches as well as ours, but alfo judged a Scandal and Reproach to the Reformation it felf: You have heard too partly, of what Confequence the right understanding of this Point is, but this will appear more clearly, whilft I fhew you.

2. That there is nothing in our Ecclefiaftical Government which can be a juft

Vol. I. ground of Separation and Non-Conformity.

I will not here go about to prove that our present Form of Government can lay the best claim to Apoftolical Inftitution of any of those that are this day any where to be found in Chriftendom; for though I do believe this in my Confcience my felf, yet I'll freely confess (though this be more, it may be, than fome of better Abilities will Con me thanks for) that this Controverfie has so much of Obscurity and Perplexity in it, that it is not eafie to Convince fuch of this, who are under any confiderable prejudices against it: I'll therefore proceed another way, and will ask our Brethren, Do they believe, that as in Scripture Fundamentals of Faith are plain and evident, but lefs neceffary Opinions are not? So in the Matter of Church-Government, the Effentials of it are exprefly and clearly deliver❜d and prefcrib'd, but not all the Circumstantials of it? If they believe fo, then they have not the leaft Reason to defert our Church upon the Account of its Polity; for there is nothing Effential to Ecclefiaftical Government that is really wanting in ours: Has any form a true Ordination or Dedication of Men to the Service of God in his Church? We

have much more; have they those who Serm. 1. for the Edification of the Churches of Christ, Preach the Gofpel, Administer the Sacraments? We as much, if not more: Have they any Method to preserve the Unity of the Churches of Chrift, and to Propagate the Faith of Chrift? (I doubt they have not, as might be easily made out from their own Records, and the Histories either of Presbytery or Independency; but if they have) I am fure we have much more: One thing I must confefs we have not, I cannot say we want it, i. e. Lay-Elders, a device as new as Popular; but I pray, of what use are thefe? They can neither Preach nor Adminifter the Sacraments, nor is there fure any Paftoral Power of Difcipline Originally in them; and as for private Inftruction and Admonition, I am very Ignorant if St. Paul does not in feveral places make that a part of the Paftoral Office of the Minifter, fure he forgot that there was fuch a Conftitution as that of Lay-Elders, in the Church of Chrift; or which I rather believe he did not think any fo fit for the discharge of this, as the Minister, being a Duty of the greatest Importance, and the greateft Difficulty: Have they a Difcipline to reftrain or cut off Offences? So have

B 3

we:

Vol. I. we: That it has not been exercised with ftrictness, is to be imputed in the

greateft part to that tendernefs which our Church ever had (and I hope will in a proper measure never want) for those who have Revolted from her; let not her Moderation become her Crime, forgive her this wrong. Thus we have then in our Conftitution all that any Man can fancy to be Effentially neceffary for the Government of the Church of Chrift, and if the Effentials only of Government be clearly and exprefly prefcrib'd in Scripture, there can be no pretence for Separation founded here.

What then? Do they believe that Chrift and his Apostles Inftituted one Form of Church-Government exprefly and clearly delivered in Scripture, not only as to Effentials, but all the Circumftantials of it? And that this Form is by the appointment of Chrift of perpetual Obligation, and unalterable, abfolutely neceffary and Effential to the Being of a Chriftian Church? If they do not believe this, I would fain know why we may not Rationally allow our Governors as much Light and Prudence, and Spiritual Affiftance too in the establishment of the Circumftantials of Ecclefiaftical Polity, as to a few, and thofe fanciful

and

and discontented Subjects? For fuch a Serm. 1. Rife moft Sects amongst us have had. Why 'tis not as fit that the Subjects fhould comply with the Laws of their Governours, as Governours with the Weaknesses and Fancies of their Subjects? But if they do believe there is any fuch Form thus evidently prescrib'd in all its Circumftantials, and Effentially neceffary to the Being of a Church, then pray be pleased without Prejudice, to confider what will follow from hence.

1. Judge if the Established Government has not a reafon to be apprehenfive of the defigns and practices of Men of this Opinion, who judge not only ours, but all other Church Governments befides their own, Anti-Chriftian, or which is all one, Anti-Scriptural, and utterly repugnant to the Word of God, and are fo far from being able to fubmit to any fuch, that they are oblig'd in Confcience, as they value the glory of God and the good of Souls, to endeavour the overthrow of any fuch Government, and the Establishment of their own,as that which Christ exprefly requires.

2. If they believe this, then judge you whether their Clergy are not obliged to difabuse and undeceive their people, and to tell 'em plainly that Rites and Cere

B 4

monies