An apology for the nonconformists ministry containing I. the reasons of their preaching, II.…

When the Act of Uniformity was not yet made or talked of, I¹ went to the now Archbishop of Canterbury, then Bishop of London, (even whilst the Kings Declaration gave us liberty), and I desired his License to preach in his Diocese, which he was pleased to grant me, upon my Voluntary subscription to the Doctrine of the Church, and those terms of peaceableness which he accepted. When the said Act of Uniformity was in fieri, I ceased that seeming Lecture which I had, before 1st of May 1662. When that Act came out, it forbade all to hold any Benefice, Cure, Lecture, &c. who had possession of any Ecclesiastical▪ Promotion the 1st of May 1662, and did not subscribe and declare as required of them in that Act, and also forbade the reception of any into such Promotion or Cure for the future▪ that should not so subscribe and declare. Neither of these being my case, (for I was out of all before May 1st 1662, and I sought no new Cure or Benefice), the Law did no more require me to subscribe and declare, than it did the Bishops, or any conformable man that for so long had Cure, Promotion, or stated employment. So that I was no Nonconformist in the sense of the Law, because I conformed as far as the Act required me to conform. And that Act not forbidding occasional Sermons to any but those that were not Licensed, my License enabled me to Preach occasionally (as many that had no places did), yet because I knew that the Bishop might revoke my License at his pleasure, and that if I so far used it, being reputed a Nonconformist, it would give offence to my superiors, I never since made use of it to this day, nor ever Preached a public Sermon. And though the Act forbade▪ me not public Catechising, or the Administration of the Sacraments, I never did either, to avoid offence. And when about three years after, the Oxford Act came forth for the restraining Nonconformists from coming within five miles of a Corporation, or of any place where they had been Teachers, or kept a Conventicle, I found that I was not concerned in that Act, because by Law I was no Nonconformist, to whom the Act by the very title and matter was limited.

When the Act of Uniformity was not yet made or talkt of, I¹ went to the now Archbishop of Canterbury, then Bishop of London, (even whilest the Kings Declaration gave us liberty), and I desired his License to preach in his Diocess, which he was pleased to grant me, upon my Voluntary subscription to the Doctrine of the Church, and those terms of peaceableness which he accepted. When the said Act of Uniformity was in fieri, I ceased that seeming Lecture which I had, before 1st of May 1662. When that Act came out, it forbad all to hold any Benefice, Cure, Lecture, &c. who had possession of any Ecclesiastical Promotion the 1st of May 1662, and did not subscribe and declare as required of them in that Act, and also forbad the reception of any into such Promotion or Cure for the future that should not so subscribe and declare. Neither of these being my case, (for I was out of all before May 1st 1662, and I sought no new Cure or Benefice), the Law did no more require me to subscribe and declare, than it did the Bishops, or any conformable man that for so long had Cure, Promotion, or stated employment. So that I was no Nonconformist in the sense of the Law, because I conformed as far as the Act required me to conform. And that Act not forbidding occasional Sermons to any but those that were not Licensed, my License enabled me to Preach occasionally (as many that had no places did), yet because I knew that the Bishop might revoke my License at his pleasure, and that if I so far used it, being reputed a Nonconformist, it would give offence to my superiors, I never since made use of it to this day, nor ever Preached a publick Sermon. And though the Act forbad me not publick Catechising, or the Administration of the Sacraments, I never did either, to avoid offence. And when about three years after, the Oxford Act came forth for the restraining Nonconformists from coming within five miles of a Corporation, or of any place where they had been Teachers, or kept a Conventicle, I found that I was not concerned in that Act, because by Law I was no Nonconformist, to whom the Act by the very title and matter was limited.