Catholic communion defended against both extremes, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…Catholick communion defended against both extreams, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…

D. O.

2. It is to be considered as armed with Laws: (1.) Such as declare and enjoin it as the only true Worship of the Church. (2.) Such as prohibit, condemn, and punish all other ways of the Worship of God in Church-Assemblies: By our communion and conjunction in it, we justify those Laws.

2. It is to be considered as armed with Laws: (1.) Such as declare and enjoyn it as the only true Worship of the Church. (2.) Such as prohibit, condemn, and punish all other ways of the Worship of God in Church-Assemblies: By our communion and conjunction in it, we justifie those Laws.

§ 3. That our Communion justifieth all the Laws that impose the Liturgy, yea, the penal severities, is too gross an Error to be written with any show of proof. What if the Creed or Lord's Prayer were too rigorously imposed,¹ or Presbytery or Independency, must we forbear them, or justify the Law? I can prove Episcopacy excluded too severely by the Covenant: But every one that is against it, justifieth not the imposition of that Covenant in that rigour. What if rigorous Laws should make it imprisonment or death, not to use our Translation of the Scriptures, our approved Catechisms, our Metre and Tunes of the Psalms, not to put off the Hat at Prayer, not to meet at the appointed Place and Hour, &c. Doth every man justify the rigour of the imposition, who obeyeth the Law? Then a rigorous Law-maker may take away our Christian Liberty, by commanding us to use such things too strictly: yea, he may turn Duty, by too strict commanding it, into Sin. These are your unproved Premises.

§ 3. THat our Communion justifieth all the Laws that impose the Liturgy, yea, the penal severeties, is too gross an Error to be written with any shew of proof. What if the Creed or Lord's Prayer were too rigorously imposed,