A second true defence of the mere nonconformists against the untrue accusations, reasonings, and…A second true defence of the meer nonconformists against the untrue accusations, reasonings, and…

This Protean word [separate] serveth for many uses: I will put one case more to the Dr. (not feigned.) A Conformist Gentleman was of ⟨p. 51⟩the opinion that his Parish Church was no true Church, because the Vicar was a Socinian, and another because the Parson was ignorant of the essentials of Christianity; and they go to the next Parish Church. A Nonconformist in the same Parish, goeth to a Nonconformists Chapel, but doth not accuse the Parish Church as none, as the other do; which of these separateth more? At Gloucester one took the Diocesan Church for no true Church, because Bishop Goodman was a Papist, and the Bishop is a constitutive part; and yet this man was for Diocesans: A Nonconformist went to a Nonconformists Church, but would not say the Diocesan Church was none: Which separated more? He separateth from his Parish Church against the Canon, who goeth from an ignorant scandalous Reader, to communicate with a Preacher at the next Parish: He separateth from the Parish Churches, who judgeth them true Churches, but having the Kings License, joineth constantly with the French, Dutch, or Nonconformists as better, still owning mental communion where he hath not local; and he separateth from the French, Dutch, or Nonconformist Churches, who thus leaveth them (as true Churches) to join with the Church of England as better. Many and various are the sorts and degrees of Separation, and not all lawful or all unlawful: None of these are the Brownists separation, which the old Nonconformists confuted; which consisted in a denial, 1. That the English Ministers were true Ministers. 2. And their Churches true Churches. 3. Or such as a Christian might lawfully live in communion with in ordinary worship. 4. And therefore they were all bound to renounce them, and set up others.

This Protean word [separate] serveth for many uses: I will put one case more to the Dr. (not feigned.) A Conformist Gentleman was of ⟨p. 51⟩the opinion that his Parish Church was no true Church, because the Vicar was a Socinian, and another because the Parson was ignorant of the essentials of Christianity; and they go to the next Parish Church. A Nonconformist in the same Parish, goeth to a Nonconformists Chappel, but doth not accuse the Parish Church as none, as the other do; which of these separateth more? At Gloucester one took the Diocesan Church for no true Church, because Bishop Goodman was a Papist, and the Bishop is a constitutive part; and yet this man was for Diocesans: A Nonconformist went to a Nonconformists Church, but would not say the Diocesan Church was none: Which separated more? He separateth from his Parish Church against the Canon, who goeth from an ignorant scandalous Reader, to communicate with a Preacher at the next Parish: He separateth from the Parish Churches, who judgeth them true Churches, but having the Kings License, joyneth constantly with the French, Dutch, or Nonconformists as better, still owning mental communion where he hath not local; and he separateth from the French, Dutch, or Nonconformist Churches, who thus leaveth them (as true Churches) to joyn with the Church of England as better. Many and various are the sorts and degrees of Separation, and not all lawful or all unlawful: None of these are the Brownists separation, which the old Nonconformists confuted; which consisted in a denial, 1. That the English Ministers were true Ministers. 2. And their Churches true Churches. 3. Or such as a Christian might lawfully live in communion with in ordinary worship. 4. And therefore they were all bound to renounce them, and set up others.