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 ...…

And now as you have Historically told us the ill Consequences of a Liturgy, I shall first tell you, It is a Mistake: None of these arise from a sound Liturgy, but from the using that alone, and not using also free Prayer with it: And next, I shall add some more of the History of Separation from Churches that have Liturgies, tho it be as displeasing to me, as it is necessary to the People.

And now as you have Historically told us the ill Consequences of a Lturgy, I shall first tell you, It is a Mistake: None of these arise from a sound Liturgy, but from the using that alone, and not using also free Prayer with it: And next, I shall add some more of the History of Separation from Churches that have Liturgies, tho it be as displeasing to me, as it is necessary to the People.

I will pass by the Histories of Muncer and Munster, and of David George in Holland, and of Henry Nicols, and the Familists, which were the Off-spring of Separation: And the sad Conflicts which they had against the sober Nonconformists; and their sad Divisions among themselves in Holland, and how many of them went further to Anabaptistry, and more; when Brown their Leader here, turned Conformist. It is only what I ⟨p. 26⟩have lived to see, that I briefly mention. When the Parliament began, 1640. there were few Separatists known comparatively in England: But when they were encouraged by hope of Success, they began to stir, and show themselves, and two sorts fell in with them, and quickly increased them, that is, 1. The exasperated Sufferers. 2. Women, and weak young Men, who thought it a great honour in Religion, to go far enough from Persecutors, and formal or ungodly Ministers, not seeing the Danger on the other Extreme. Holy and Learned John Ball foresaw the Danger, and wrote his Book, called, The Trial of Separation: and after, two more; one against Can, and another against two New England Ministers. The Assembly being called, even sober and excellent Men that were for the old Conformity in case of Necessity, but not otherwise; Five of their number, differing from all the rest, save two more, wrote for Independency. This Controversy began the great Breach, while the Five Dissenters stood stiffly for a Liberty, that Men might gather New Churches out of the Churches of the other Ministers, of as many as should come to them in all places, and should have all Church-Power in those separated Churches. The other did not what might have been done skilfully to heal the Breach, tho they did much. The two Parties drew others into the Division. Those called Presbyterians were the more quiet, because they thought the Dissenters few. Independency might have been tolerated, but Separation was that which would not be endured, when nothing was imposed in Doctrine or Worship, which the Dissenters excepted against. The Separators finding themselves few, were the more industrious, especially to get Interest in Parliament and Army. In the Parliament, they could never get near the Major Vote; but they had some, whose Policy and Industry made up what was wanting in Number: And by them, they got the Army new modelled;