A fresh suit against human ceremonies in God's worship. Or a triplication unto. D.…

I thought good, overseeing the Press, to confirm the Authors report, by a more particular relation which I have received from a person of good credit, set down in writ as followeth.

I thought good, overseeing the Presse, to confirme the Authors report, by a more particular relation which I have received from a person of good credit, set downe in writt as followeth.

MR. Cartwright being beyond the seas, in printing the rest of his 2. Reply, wherein that indulgence is, sent to the Ministers of England who sought reformation with him, for their opinion of the use of the Surplice in case of deprivation: 22. of whom met thereabout: of whom 19 jointly agreed that it was simply unlawful in any case, but the other three said otherwise; wherefore it was agreed by all, that each part should write their opinion, and their reasons to him, which they did: but the letter of the nineteen miscarried, and that of the other three was delivered, which he taking as the letter of the whole, supposed their joint consent had been, that the loss of the ministry altered the case of the unlawfulness, & so that they were all against him; whereupon be mistrusting his own judgement, and being much perplexed thereabout, suffered himself to be ⟨p. 23⟩swayed unto what is there written: but afterward understanding the right, he was much more perplexed; yea (as he said) more then ever he was, in that to the great prejudice of the truth, he had suffered his conscience to be so defiled▪ which was forbidden, 1. Cor. 8.7. which he bartily sorrowed to many, professing that if he again put pen to paper about that subject, he would clear the cause, and blame himself, praying them to signify the same freely in the mean time, the which they did, so that it ever since hath been currant among all his friends, and constantly affirmed by them to all on due occasions, and particularly affirmed to M. Sprint by a Gentleman in the presence of one Nobleman, two Gentlemen, 27. Ministers, and many professors, in his course, in the scanning his book then about to be printed divers years before it was printed, sundry also of those ministers avouched the same, some on their own knowledge, others upon undoubted testimony, which yet is ready to be avouched in due case of need, and should now be expressed, were not the naming of the avouchers dangerous unto them, and so not to be done without their knowledge, which now cannot be.

MR. Cartwright being beyond the seas, in printing the rest of his 2. Reply, werein that indulgence is, sent to the Ministers of England who sought reformation with him, for their opinion of the use of the Surplice in case of deprivation: 22. of whom met therabout: of whom 19 joyntly agreed that it was simply unlawfull in any case, but the other three sayd otherwise; wherefore it was agreed by all, that each part should write their opinion, and their reasons to him, which they did: but the letter of the nineteene miscarried, and that of the other three was delivered, which he taking as the letter of the whole, supposed their joynt consent had beene, that the losse of the ministery altered the case of the unlawfulnesse, & so that they were all against him; whereupon be mistrusting his owne judgement, and being much perplexed thereabout, suffered himselfe to be ⟨p. 23⟩swayed unto what is there written: but afterward understanding the right, hee was much more perplexed; yea (as he sayd) more then ever he was, in that to the great prejudice of the truth, he had suffered his conscience to be so defiled▪ which was forbidden, 1. Cor. 8.7. which hee bartily sorrowed to many, professing that if he againe put penn to paper about that subject, he would cleare the cause, and blame himselfe, praying them to signify the same freely in the meane tyme, the which they did, so that it ever since hath been currant among all his friends, and constantly affirmed by them to all on due occasions, and particularly affirmed to M. Sprint by a Gentleman in the presence of one Nobleman, two Gentlemen, 27. Ministers, and many professors, in his course, in the scanning his booke then about to be printed divers yeares before it was printed, sundry also of those ministers avouched the same, some on their owne knowledge, others vpon vndoubted testimony, which yet is ready to be avouched in due case of need, and should now be expressed, were not the naming of the avouchers dangerous vnto them, and so not to be done without their knowledge, which now cannot be.

For the point it self, when a man doth but stand in ⟨p. 24⟩doubt betwixt using the ceremonies, and suffering of deprivation, it must needs be more safe, patiently to suffer himself to be thrust from his ministry, then to retain it and offend his conscience by using the Ceremonies. For to be restrained by authority from his lawful function, because he will not yield to the doing of that which to him is sin, is no more sin in the sufferer, then to surcease his public preaching whilst he is held in prison, where he wanteth occasion. Thus the use of that is avoided, which he disalloweth, and the blame of leaving his standing, is theirs who cast him from thence, and not his. So no sin is committed either in the use of that he disalloweth, or in sustaining deprivation. But to hold his place, and to practise against conscience, is to commit one great sin at the least.

For the point it selfe, when a man doth but stand in ⟨p. 24⟩doubt betwixt using the ceremonies, and suffering of d•privation, it must needs be more safe, patiently to suffer himselfe to bee thrust from his minist•ry, then to reteine it and offend his conscience by using the Ceremonies. For to bee restrained by authori•y from his lawfull function, because hee will not yeeld to the doing of that which to him is sinne, is no more sinne in the sufferer, then to surcease his publicke preaching whilest he is held in prison, where he wanteth occasion. Thus the use of that is avoyded, which he disalloweth, and the blame of leaving his standing, is theirs who cast him from thence, and not his. So no sinn is committed ei•her in the use of that hee disalloweth, or in susteining deprivation. But to hold his place, and to practise against conscience, is to commit one great sinn at the least.

SECT. XV.

IN the last place, the Defendant bringeth forth to answer the words of the Apostle, 1. Thess. 5.22. Abstain from all appearance of evil. But as this argument is not found at all in that page of the Abridgement which he citeth, so in the words or sense which he setteth down, I dare say it is not used either of them, or any other against the ceremonies. Yet let us hear his answer. The Apostle speaketh (saith he) of the opinions of ⟨p. 25⟩private men. But 1. what warrant hath he to restrain a general precept, when the universality of it agreeth wit• the law? Abstain from all appearance, saith the Apostle: i. e. saith the Def. from some private opinions. 2. Why must appearance of evil be needs understood of opinions only? two or three interpreters indeed do understand it of doctrine most properly: but the most otherwise; and the word translated appearance, signifying rather an object of seeing then of hearing, leads us rather to the eye, as in actions, gestures, garments, then to the ear in doctrines. 3. For that which he addeth of private mens opinions, there is no circumstance of the text, nor any reason or authority that doth warrant such a gloss.

IN the last place, the Defendant bringeth forth to answere the words of the Apostle, 1. Thess. 5.22. Abstaine from all appearance of evill. But as this argument is not found at all in that page of the Abridgment which he citeth, so in the words or sence which he setteth downe, I dare say it is not used either of them, or any other against the ceremonies. Yet let us heare his answer. The Apostle speaketh (sayth he) of the opinions of ⟨p. 25⟩private men. But 1. what warrant hath he to restraine a generall praecept, when the universalitie of it agreeth wit• the law? Abstaine from all appearance, sayth the Apostle: i. e. sayth the Def. from some private opinions. 2. Why must appearance of evill be needs understood of opinions onely? two or three interpreters indeed do understand it of doctrine most properly: but the most otherwise; and the word translated appearance, signifying rather an object of seeing then of hearing, leads us rather to the eye, as in actions, gesturs, garments, then to the ear in doctrines. 3. For that which he addeth of private mens opinions, there is no circumstance of the text, nor any reason or authority that doth warrant such a glosse.

SECT. XVII.

Among his accusations wherein he chargeth us with manifold scandals, the first is, that some weak ones by occasion of these differences, stand amazed, and so become more remiss in profession or religion. Where 1. it is to be observed, that when we spake of weak-ones sect. 12. it was putt off with this pretence, that they were such as we had catechised. Now then, who are these weak-ones? I hope the Bishops provide that people of their Dioceses are well catechised: whence then is this weakness. 2. Differences in matters of circumstance are not wont to breed scandal, until some authority enjoin uniformity, as we may see in the primitive Churches. 3. If differences be the occasion ⟨p. 26⟩of this scandal, surely those that differ from us, may as well be accused therefore, as we that differ from them, especially when we urge nothing of ours upon them, but they impose their own devices upon us, and so are causes of the differences. 4. The amazement which some have, wondering what will be the event of differences, is no damnable error, which by the Def. is required to a scandal, sect. 1. And if they grow remiss in religion upon it, that is their sin. I am sure zeal against superstition, and for pure and undefiled worship, hath no fitness in it to work remissness in religion: but urging of human devices in Gods worship, tendeth directly thither.

AMong his accusations wherein he chargeth us with manifold scandalls, the first is, that some weak ones by occasion of these differences, stand amazed, and so become more remisse in profession or religion. Where 1. it is to bee observed, that when wee spake of weake-ones sect. 12. it was putt off with this pretence, that they were such as we had catechised. Now then, who are these weak-ones? I hope the Bishops provide that people of their Diocesses are well catechised: whence then is this weaknesse. 2. Differēces in matters of circumstance are not wont to breed scandall, untill some authority injoyne uniformity, as we may see in the primitive Churches. 3. If differences be the occasion ⟨p. 26⟩of this scandall, surely those that differ from us, may as well be accused therefore, as we that differ from them, especially when we urge nothing of ours upon them, but they impose their owne devices upon us, and so are causes of the differences. 4. The amazement which some have, wondring what will be the event of differences, is no damnable error, which by the Def. is required to a scandall, sect. 1. And if they grow remisse in religion upon it, that is their sinne. I am sure zeale against superstition, and for pure and undefiled worship, hath no fitnesse in it to work remissenesse in religion: but urging of humaine devices in Gods worship, tendeth directly thither.

SECT. XVIII.

The second charge of scandal, is in respect of the Separatists. Where 1. I ask, if Gaius had made a separation from the Church wherein Diotrephes lived, whether the Apostle John had been cause of that scandal, because he condemned his abuse of excommunication, Joh. 3.9.10. 2. If any separate from churches where Images are retained, who is the cause, they that dislike of Images, or they that retain them? 3. The dislike of Ceremonies is not the chief cause for which separation is made: but the intolerable abuses which are in Ecclesiastical Courts, by which it cometh to pass, that many poor men being troubled at the first for a small thing, afterward are driven to fly the country: and flying with a hatred of such courses, are ready ⟨p. 27⟩to receive that impression which is most opposite unto them. The thing it self is plain enough to all indifferent men, that Ecclesiastical corruptions urged and obtruded, are the proper occasion of separation.

THe second charge of scandall, is in respect of the Separatists. Where 1. I aske, if Gaius had made a separation from the Church wherein Diotrephes lived, whether the Apostle Iohn had beene cause of that scandall, because he condemned his abuse of excommunication, Ioh. 3.9.10. 2. If any separate from churches where Images are retained, who is the cause, they that dislike of Images, or they that retaine them? 3. The dislike of Ceremonies is not the cheife cause for which separation is made: but the intollerable abuses which are in Ecclesiasticall Courts, by which it commeth to passe, that many poore men being troubled at the first for a small thing, afterward are driven to flye the countrey: and flying with a hatred of such courses, are ready ⟨p. 27⟩to receive that impression which is most opposit unto them. The thing it selfe is plaine enough to all indifferent men, that Ecclesiasticall corruptions urged and obtruded, are the proper occasion of separation.

SECT. XIX. XX.

IN the next place the Papists are alleged as persons offended by Non-conformity, because they a•e utterly unpersuadable to enter into a Church where all ancient rites are professedly rejected. But 1. the refusing of conformity by the Ministers, do not, I hope, make these ancient rites (much less all) to be professedly rejected by our Church, For then we may plead the profession of our mother as well as the Defendant: which he I am sure will not grant. 2. This assertion which is given as a reason, is evidently false. For in Scotland, France, the Low countries, and such like Churches, where none of these ceremonies are retained, the power of Gods word (which doth not depend on human Ceremonies (is as effectual to the conversion of Papists, as in England. 3. How doth this agree with that which the Defendant hath so often told us, that our ceremonies are not the same with the Papists Ceremonies: and that the Papists have no great conceit of our ceremonies, cap. 2. sect. 11. 4. If our contentions about these things be a scandal to the Papist, let them look to it that cast these apples of contention into the Church, under the pretence of peace and uniformity. 5. One minister without conformity, as old M. Mids•y of Ratsdell, who was after silenced for his labour, hath converted more Papists ⟨p. 28⟩then any (I might say then all) of the Bishops in England, with all his Ceremonial observations. 6. It is well known that there are far more Papists and Popishly affected in those places where ceremonies are most observed, then where they have been diffused. 7. It is answered in the Abridgement, pag. 47.48. that ceremonies are not for the edification of the Papists, but for the hardening of them. And that Papists are not so much to be respected as brethren. To the latter of which words, the Defendant replieth with a descant upon the term brethren, sect. 20. but saith nothing at all to the purpose. 8. What manner of converts they are usually who are addicted to human ceremonies, we may see in the Archbishop of Spalato, and such others.

IN the next place the Papists are alledged as persons offended by Non-conformity, because they a•e utterly unperswadeable to ent•r into a Church where all ancient rites are professedly rejected. But 1. the refusing of conformity by the Ministers, doe not, I hope, make these ancient rites (much lesse all) to be professedly rejected by our Church, For then we may plead the profession of our mother as well as the Defendant: which he I am sure will not grant. 2. This assertion which is given as a reason, is evidently false. For in Scotland, France, the Low countries, and such like Churches, where none of these ceremonies are retained, the power of Gods word (which doth not depend on humaine Ceremonies (is as effectuall to the conversion of Papists, as in England. 3. How doth this agree with that which the Defendant hath so often told us, that our ceremonies are not the same with the Papists Ceremonies: and that the Papists have no great conceit of our ceremonies, cap. 2. sect. 11. 4. If our contentions about these things bee a scandall to the Papist, let them looke to it that cast these apples of contention into the Church, under the pretense of peace and uniformity. 5. One minister without conformity, as old M. Midsy of Ratsdell, who was after silenced for his labour, hath converted more Papists

SECT. XXI.

The greatest scandal of all (saith the Defend.) is against the Church. Now this Non-conformists are made guilty of two ways: 1. comparatively in this section, & then absolutely in the next. The comparative accusation is, that we for avoiding of offence towards our brethren, grievously offend our mother, in that wherein we owe obedience unto her. Where 1. the question is taken for granted, for we deny that we owe obedience in the ceremonies to any man or society of men. 2. If our mother be somewhat angry, that is not presently a scandal by his definition, sect. 1. but when she is provoked to a mortal error. Now what mortal error do we provoke the Church to? Our desire and ⟨p. 29⟩scope is, that the Ceremonies should be either wholly removed, or else left free to use or disuse: this is no mortal error, I hope. The event by accident is the silencing, depriving excluding, and molesting of us for Nonconformity: This indeed is a great error and sin of the Prelates: but as was formerly showed, the beginning of it is in their irregular Canons, and the ending of it, in the cruel executions. 3. By applying our selves to the will of the Prelates in these Ceremonies, we should, though not anger, yet greatly scandalize them, by confirming them in a sin of making their own will a rule to the Churches, even in mystical ceremonies of superstitious worship, contrary to their and our daily prayer, Thy will be done. 4. The convocation doth not carry herself like a mother toward us: neither do we acknowledge any such honour to belong unto it. As for the faithful congregations of England, the greatest part of them would willingly be rid of these burdens.

THe greatest scandall of all (sayth the Defend.) is against the Church. Now this Non-conformists are made guilty of two wayes: 1. comparatively in this section, & then absolutely in the next. The comparative accusation is, that we for avoyding of offence towards our brethren, grievously offend our mother, in that wherein wee owe obedience unto her. Where 1. the quaestion is taken for granted, for we deny that we owe obedience in the ceremonies to any man or society of men. 2. If our mother be somewhat angry, that is not presently a scandall by his definition, sect. 1. but when shee is provoked to a mortall errour. Now what mortall errour doe we provoke the Church to? Our desire and ⟨p. 29⟩scope is, that the Ceremonies should be either wholly removed, or else left free to use or disuse: this is no mortall errour, I hope. The event by accident is the silencing, depriving excluding, and molesting of us for Nonconformity: This indeed is a great errour and sinne of the Prelates: but as was formerly shewed, the beginning of it is in their irregular Canons, and the ending of it, in the cruell executions. 3. By applying our selves to the will of the Prelats in these Ceremonies, wee should, though not anger, yet greatly candalize them, by confirming them in a sinne of making their owne will a rule to the Churches, even in mysticall ceremonies of superstitious worship, contrary to their and our daily prayer, Thy will be done. 4. The convocation doth not carry herselfe like a mother toward us: neither doe we acknowledge any such honour to belong unto it. As for the faithfull congregations of England, the greatest part of them would willingly be rid of these burthens.

The rest of this Section is nothing pertinent: yet two things may be noted in it. 1. An error that the number of Jewish Proselytes was great, and the converted Gentiles few, Act. 15. 2. A gross assertion, that after the doctrine of Indifferency in eating of meats, was made public by the Church, then to have sought by abstaining to avoid the offence of some, had been to the prejudice of Christian liberty, and to the scandal of the Church.

The rest of this Section is nothing pertinent: yet two things may bee noted in it. 1. An errour that the number of Iewish Proselites was great, and the converted Gentiles few, Act. 15. 2. A grosse assertion, that after the doctrine of Indifferency in eating of meats, was made publicke by the Church, then to have sought by abstaining to avoyd the offence of some, had beene to the prejudice of Christian liberty, and to the scandall of the Church.

The other accusation of contempt, is only objected Sect. 2•. and varnished over with a few glossing words Sect. 23. and therefore may well be answered with contempt. But he that will see a full refutation of this, let ⟨p. 30⟩him read Mr. Parker chap. 5. sect. 11.12. I am weary of wrestling with the wind: yet one unworthy and unchristian taunt I cannot pass by, that he upbraideth the Ministers with, living upon voluntary contribution, and fear of offending their maintainers. For 1. when as he confesseth, he hath no windows to look into mens consciences by, what rule of religion will permit him to cast upon his brethren such a suspicion contrary to their profession, of practising and speaking against their consciences for gaining of a poor contribution? Is there not far more cause to think, that great livings, and worldly honours (one of the choicest darts that Satan hath in his quiver, and therefore tried against our Saviour himself when all other failed, Mat. 4.8, 9.) is it not more likely I say that these promotions bear more sway in the minds of our great Prelates, then a poor supply of necessaries with others? 2. Neither all, nor the most part of them against whom he w•iteth did live upon contributions. Though they need not have been ashamed thereof if they had: seeing not only the primitive Pastors did so, but even in our time, Mr. Perkins and other such lights of our Church, have with that kind of life done more good then all our Cathedral men with their great revenues. 3. Who are the cause that many are forced to live upon contribution? have not the Loiterers of Cathedral Churches engrossed a great part of that maintenance whereby labouring Preachers should be maintained? Do not our Pluralists and Non-residents carry away the fa• of the greatest livings, & leave scarce a Serving-mans wages to their Curates; so ⟨p. 31⟩that either they must be supplied by contribution, or else by begging? Nay, do not the people in divers places take it for a great courtesy at the Non-residents hands, if he will take his Tithes and suffer them to procure and maintain to themselves an honest minister in his place? have not our honourable Parliament offered to provide some competent maintenance for the Ministers, if the Clergy would forbear their sinful excesses? 4.