An humble apology for non-conformists with modest and serious reflections on the Friendly debate…

and a man may remove from his Fathers House, it being infected, with a purpose to come thither when all is clear and well again. And their desire and prayer is still, That they that went forth of their Churches weeping (yet bearing ⟨p. 12⟩good Seed, viz. the Doctrine of Faith, Repentance, and Obedience to God, and his Vicegerent) may come again rejoicing, bringing their Sheaves (that is, their Congregations) with them.

and a man may remove from his Fathers House, it being infected, with a purpose to come thither when all is clear and well again. And their desire and prayer is still, That they that went forth of their Churches weeping (yet bearing ⟨p. 12⟩good Seed, viz. the Doctrine of Faith, Repentance, and Obedience to God, and his Vicegerent) may come again rejoycing, bringing their Sheaves (that is, their Congregations) with them.

Quest. But is not this partial and occasional withdrawing of some Non-conforming Ministers and people, from the public Legal Assemblies, justly charged with Schism?

Quest. But is not this partial and occasiona• withdrawing of some Non-conforming Ministers and people, from the publick Legal Assemblies, justly charged with Schism?

Answ. Hear what a Romish Doctor saith, which is cited by Bishop Bramhal, in his Treatise of Schism, pag. 7, 8. When there is a mutual division of two parts or Members of the Mystical Body of the Church, one from the other, yet both retaining Communion with the Universal Church, (which for the most part springs from some doubtful Opinion, or less necessary part of Divine Worship) quam cunque partem amplexus fueris Schismaticus non audies, quippe quod Universa Ecclesia neutiam damnarit; what side soever you take, you are not a Schismatic, &c.