<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2010-07-31</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Megan Marion</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Checklist:
x Add TEMPHEAD, change DATE, validate
xAdd DIV TYPEs, validate
xReview structure, use FRONT,BODY, BACK or rarely GROUP
xCheck PB placement and completeness, ensure sequence of N=""
xProof title page(s)
xCheck HEAD TRAILER ARGUMENT EPIGRAPH OPENER CLOSER SIGNED SALUTE BYLINE
xCheck ^, oe, abq, italic I / J, _Initals, space between &amp;c.
xCheck # @ -- UNCLEAR LB FIGURE
xCheck q; startq endq Q
xCorrect illegibles from proofsheet
xCheck illegible page, para, line, span, word, dollar signs
Final validate

Corrected [ ] illegible groups out of [ ].
Converted [ ] illegible groups to GAP DESC="illegible".
DONE</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B10107">
<STC T="W">s6381</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">[ocm]80924259</BIBNO>
<VID>192060</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>A Peaceable and Friendly ADDRESS TO THE <HI>Non-Conformi&s;ts:</HI> Written upon their de&s;iring An Act of TOLERATION Without The <HI>Sacramental Te&s;t,</HI></P>
<P>DUBLIN, Printed at the <HI>Po&s;t-Office-Coffee-Hou&s;e</HI> in <HI>Fi&s;h-Shamble-Street,</HI> for <HI>John Fo&s;ter,</HI> Book&s;eller, at the Sign of the <HI>Dolphin</HI> in <HI>Skinner-Row,</HI> 1697.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="imprimatur">
<PB REF="2">
<P>Imprimatur</P>
<P>Hoc Scriptum, cui Titulus, <HI>A Peaceable and Friendly Addre&s;s to the Non-Conformi&s;ts, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<CLOSER><DATELINE><DATE>July 19. 1697.</DATE></DATELINE>
<SIGNED>Narci&s;&s;us Dublin,</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="dedication">
<PB REF="2" MS="y">
<HEAD>To His Grace the Lord Primate of IRELAND.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>My Lord,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>THe hope which I have of doing &s;ome good, or at lea&s;t, the confidence that I &s;hall do no hurt in Publi&s;hing this &s;mall Piece, has induced me to expo&s;e both it and my &s;elf to the cen&s;ure of the <HI>world.</HI> And altho there may be nothing el&s;e in it which may recommend it to <HI>your</HI> Grace, yet I a&s;&s;ure my &s;elf <HI>You</HI> will approve of that temper and calmne&s;s which I have en|deavoured with all care to pre&s;erve in every period of it. For, as bitterne&s;s, or &s;harpne&s;s of &s;tyle is contrary to Charity, no le&s;s than mirth and drollery in matters of <HI>Religion,</HI> are to the &s;e|riou&s;ne&s;s of Chri&s;tianity; &s;o have I ever ob&s;erved, that &s;uch a &s;atyrical way of writing is much more effectual to rai&s;e the Pa&s;&s;ion, than to convince the Judgment of an Adver&s;ary. For which rea&s;on I have been &s;tudiou&s;ly careful to avoid all expre&s;|&s;ions which might exa&s;perate, or give offence to our <HI>Non-con|forming</HI> Brethren; and &s;hall, with God's Ble&s;&s;ing, continue the &s;ame care, if ever there be an occa&s;ion for me any further to defend what I have here written.</P>
<P>And upon this occa&s;ion, I be&s;eech your Grace to give me leave to remember to the World how Eminent an Example of Tem|per and Moderation You have con&s;tantly &s;hewn Your &s;elf, as to all others, and at all times, &s;o particularly to tho&s;e to whom I now am about to Addre&s;s my &s;elf. No man could be more true and firm to the E&s;tabli&s;hed Church, and at the &s;ame time more mild and gentle to tho&s;e who di&s;&s;ent from her, than <HI>Your Grace</HI> has always been. Of which, <HI>Your</HI> unbya&s;&s;ed Steadine&s;s through all changes and vici&s;&s;itudes; together with the great
<PB REF="3" MS="y">lenity even in tho&s;e times when it was most in your Grace's power to have u&s;ed &s;everity towards them, is a demon&s;tration beyond all exception.</P>
<P>Nor can I omit to take notice of the admirable good effect which your moderate way of Dealing with &s;uch per&s;ons has had upon divers of the Non-conforming Mini&s;ters, who were in the&s;e parts at the time when your Grace formerly &s;ate in the Chair of this Dioce&s;s; &s;everal of whom, (as I have been infor|med) being not only convinced by the Arguments, but even won by your Obliging and Chri&s;tian temper, did freely and readily yield to receive Ordination at your Grace's hands, according to the form pre&s;cribed by our Church; and continued ever after to conform to the wor&s;hip and di&s;cipline of it.</P>
<P>Nor have I any thing el&s;e to excu&s;e my pre&s;umption in this Dedication, but only the hope that your Grace will be ready, ac|cording to your accu&s;tomed Candour, to approve of, and encou|rage every man, tho in the meanest &s;tation, who endeavors, ac|cording to his capacity, to follow any part of that excellent pat|tern which Your Grace for &s;o many years has &s;et to the World.</P>
<P>That Your Grace may enjoy all the Happine&s;s of this Life, until &s;uch time as You &s;hall exchange it for a Crown of Eter|nal Glory, Is the mo&s;t earne&s;t and hearty Prayers of</P>
<CLOSER><DATELINE>Cork, <DATE>July <HI>15. 1697.</HI></DATE></DATELINE>
<SIGNED>Your Grace's Mo&s;t Obedient Chaplain, And mo&s;t Obliged Humble Servant, <HI>EDW. SYNGE.</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="notice">
<PB REF="3">
<HEAD>An Adverti&s;ement to the Reader.</HEAD>
<P>THe following Addre&s;s was Written in the year 1695, upon occa&s;ion of &s;ome Papers, which a little before had pa&s;t between the E&s;tabli&s;h'd Church, and Prote&s;tant Di&s;&s;enting Party, in Reference to a Bill of Indulgence, then under con&s;idera|tion in, or ready (as was &s;uppos'd) to be brought into the <HI>Hou&s;e of Commons:</HI> Which Controver&s;y having been for &s;ome time &s;ilenced, by the frequent Adjournment of both Hou&s;es of Parliament, it was thought un&s;ea&s;onable to Publi&s;h any thing in that Interval, which might relate to it: But becau&s;e it is not improbable, but that our Di&s;|&s;enting Brethren will, now the Parliament meets again, endeavour to gain the &s;ame Point which before they aim'd at; it is hoped that tho&s;e Papers may at lea&s;t be as &s;ea&s;onable now, as they would have been, had they been Publi&s;h'd at the time when they were Written.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB REF="4">
<PB N="7" REF="4" MS="y">
<HEAD>A Peaceable and Friendly Addre&s;s <HI>To the Non-Conformi&s;ts.</HI> Written upon their De&s;iring <HI>An Act of Toleration without the Sacramental Te&s;t.</HI></HEAD>
<P>SInce it is the Duty of every Chri&s;tian to promote the Peace and Unity of the Church, and heartily to endeavour that there may be <HI>no Divi&s;ions among&s;t us;</HI> but that we may be <HI>perfectly joined together in the &s;ame mind, and in the &s;ame judgment,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.10. <HI>In one &s;pirit, and with one mind, &s;triving together for the faith of the Go&s;pel, Phil.</HI> 1.27. And &s;ince, when one party of Chri&s;tians &s;eparate from another, it mu&s;t either be for a ju&s;t cau&s;e, or without a ju&s;t cau&s;e; it will follow, that where-ever there is Schi&s;m in any Church, and one Congregation &s;et up in oppo&s;ition to another, and refu|&s;ing to join in Communion with the other, there mu&s;t, of nece&s;|&s;ity, be a &s;in either on the one &s;ide or the other; either in them who give the others a ju&s;t ground of &s;eparation, or in them who &s;eparate without a ju&s;t ground.</P>
<P>That there is a &s;eparation between you and us, and thereby a Schi&s;m made in our National Church, is too apparent; but where the &s;in of this Divi&s;ion lies, whether upon u<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">, for giving you a ju&s;t cau&s;e of dividing, or upon you for &s;eparating from us without any &s;uch cau&s;e; this is what on both &s;ides we ought to enquire after, and to reform it where ever we find it. And in order to the making of this di&s;covery, I do (as I tru&s;t, in the fear of God, and in a true &s;pirit of Meekne&s;s and Charity) be&s;eech you all calmly and &s;eri|ou&s;ly to weigh and con&s;ider the&s;e following things which I offer unto you.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, Is there any of tho&s;e things which are nece&s;&s;ary to the &s;al|vation of a Chri&s;tian, wanting in the Communion of our Church? Do we not profe&s;s and teach the true Chri&s;tian Faith in all its funda|mental
<PB N="2" REF="5">Articles? And if &s;ome of our Divines do perhaps differ from yours in the determination, or rather the manner of expre&s;&s;ing of &s;ome Theological Points; will any one venture to &s;ay, that the ex|plicit belief of &s;uch Doctrines in difference, is ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary unto Salvation? Do we not require all men to lead vertuous and holy lives? And is any part of Chri&s;t's In&s;titution omitted by us in the Admini&s;tration either of Bapti&s;m or the Lord's Supper? Or what is there more required by God, in order to any man's Salva|tion, than a true Faith, an holy Life, to be admitted into the Church by Bapti&s;m, and to own our Communion with it by the frequent participation of the Lord's Supper? In &s;hort, if we are deficient in any thing which is nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation, let us know what it is that is wanting among&s;t us, and let the nece&s;&s;ity of it be proved, and then if we receive it not, the Sin is ours.</P>
<P>Secondly, is there any thing required by us from tho&s;e who Com|municate with us, which is a Sin, and therefore not to be practi&s;ed with a good Con&s;cience? However unnece&s;&s;ary or impertinent any thing may be e&s;teemed, yet nothing is to be looked upon as a Sin but what is contrary to the Law of God: Are then any of our Con&s;titutions contrary to God's Law? Or has God any where for|bid us to u&s;e the Sign of the Cro&s;s after Bapti&s;m, a Ring in the Ce|lebration of Marriage, a Surplice in Divine Service, the po&s;ture of kneeling at the reception of the Lord's Supper, or any of tho&s;e Rites and Ceremonies which are appointed to be u&s;ed among&s;t us? And can any thing be called a Sin which God has no where forbid? But if you &s;hall &s;ay, that tho the bare u&s;e of the&s;e things is not for|bid, yet we u&s;e them after a &s;uper&s;titious manner, whereby they be|come &s;inful. I intreat you to con&s;ider that we have &s;ufficiently declared, that we place no holine&s;s in any &s;uch things as the&s;e, (wherein our Super&s;tition, if any there were, could only con&s;i&s;t) but that we only u&s;e them as things in them&s;elves indifferent, or|dained by human Authority for decency and order, and at any time alterable by the &s;ame or the like Authority that appointed them. To conclude this Point, either &s;uch things as are indifferent in them|&s;elves, may po&s;&s;ibly be u&s;ed without Super&s;tition, as Circum&s;tances in the wor&s;hip of God, or el&s;e it will &s;carce be po&s;&s;ible to perform any outward Wor&s;hip at all without Super&s;tition: For outward
<PB N="3" REF="5">Wor&s;hip cannot be performed without Outward Circum&s;tances; And no Man &s;ure will pretend that all the Outward Circum&s;tances of Wor&s;hip are pre&s;cribed or regulated by God him&s;elf. Since then our Rites and Ceremonies of Religion are things in them&s;elves indif|ferent, and therefore &s;uch as may be u&s;ed, without Super&s;tition, do you your &s;elves teach us how we &s;hall more effectually di&s;claim all Super&s;tition, in the u&s;e of them, than we already do: And if we give you not &s;atisfaction in the matter, the fault is ju&s;tly ours. But to charge us with Super&s;tition in the u&s;e of tho&s;e things which do not nece&s;&s;arily imply that &s;in in them&s;elves, and that at the &s;ame time, when we do po&s;itively renounce, not only the Name of Super&s;tition, but al&s;o the thing it &s;elf; In my poor opinion, is not &s;o agreeable unto Chri&s;tian Charity, which <HI>believeth all things,</HI> and <HI>hopeth all things,</HI> 1 Cor 13.7.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> If then in the Communion of our Church there be nei|ther any thing wanting which is nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation, nor, on the other &s;ide, any thing pre&s;cribed in it which is &s;inful; does it not apparently follow from hence that our Communion is at lea&s;t inno|cent? And that any Chri&s;tian may, with a good Con&s;cience, join with us in God's Wor&s;hip and Sacraments, &s;ince thereby he needs not involve him&s;elf in any &s;in, either of Commi&s;&s;ion or Omi&s;&s;ion. If you &s;hall &s;ay that our Communion, tho' to us, who are per&s;uaded of the Lawfulne&s;s of it, it may be innocent; yet to you would be &s;inful; becau&s;e &s;ome of you judge it ab&s;olutely unlawfull to Com|municate with us (and no Man ought to act directly again&s;t his own Con&s;cience) and others of you do, at lea&s;t, doubt whether it be lawful or not; Whereas in &s;uch Ca&s;es as the&s;e, every man ought to <HI>be fully per&s;uaded in his own mind,</HI> Ro. 14.5. And <HI>he that doubteth is damned if he</HI> Conform, as well as if he <HI>eat, becau&s;e he</HI> Conformeth <HI>not of Faith</HI> (that is to &s;ay, is not throughly per&s;uaded of the Law|fulne&s;s of what he does) <HI>for what&s;oever is not of Faith is Sin,</HI> v. 23. To tho&s;e who judge our Communion unlawful, I mu&s;t again urge what I have already &s;aid in the two preceding Paragraphs, and tell them that their Judgment in this is not only fal&s;e, but al&s;o ap|parently uncharitable, except they can &s;hew either that &s;omething is wanting, and not to be had in our Church, which yet God has com|manded; or &s;omething appointed and required which God has for|bidden,
<PB N="4" REF="6">for nothing can be ab&s;olutely &s;inful and unlawful, except it be to omit the one, or to do the other. But as for tho&s;e who only doubt, that is to &s;ay, are not well a&s;&s;ured, whether it be lawful to Conform to our Communion or not: If they are not able by any means to clear their doubts, and &s;atisfie their Scruples; yet &s;urely, in &s;uch a Ca&s;e, they ought to choo&s;e that way which is mo&s;t &s;afe, and free from the danger of &s;in; and if there be a plain and evident Law of God which direct; them one way, they ought not to for&s;ake that way, and go another, upon &s;uch &s;ugge&s;tions as they own to be but ob&s;cure and doubtful. Now, what can be more evidently com|manded, than that we &s;hould &s;eek and promote the Peace and U|nity of the Church (as I have &s;aid at the beginning of this Ad|dre&s;s). And that we &s;hould give obedience unto the commands of lawful Authority, <HI>Rom.</HI> 13.1, 1 <HI>Pet.</HI> 2.13. But, on the other &s;ide, the ca&s;e in hand &s;uppo&s;es a man to be only doubtful (and not re|&s;olved either way) whether it be lawful to conform to the Rites and Ceremonies by Law E&s;tabli&s;hed in our Church; Now, if, after a rea&s;onable time for enquiry, he is not able to determine this doubt, &s;o as po&s;itively to &s;atisfy him&s;elf upon &s;olid grounds, that &s;uch Con|formity is unlawful; what rea&s;on can be given why &s;uch a doubt (which probably may be the effect of his fancy, or prejudice only, and not of any &s;ober and impartial rea&s;oning, becau&s;e it never comes to a determination) &s;hould be put in the ballance again&s;t tho&s;e plain commands of God which I have mentioned: And as long as &s;uch a man remains doubtful as to both &s;ides, why may not the above ob|jected words of St. <HI>Paul</HI> be more &s;trongly urged for Conformity than again&s;t it? For why &s;hould a man refu&s;e to conform, if he be <HI>only</HI> doubtful, and not <HI>fully per&s;waded in his own mind,</HI> that he ought not to conform? And why may I not &s;ay, that <HI>he that doubteth is damned, if he</HI> refu&s;eth conformity, rather than if he conform? <HI>becau&s;e he</HI> refu|&s;eth <HI>not of Faith;</HI> (that is to &s;ay, is not throughly per&s;waded of the lawfulne&s;s of &s;uch a refu&s;al; there being two plain Laws of God which direct him to conform, and nothing but a doubt, which is rai&s;ed but upon ob&s;cure grounds, that re&s;trains him from it) <HI>for what&s;oever is not of Faith</HI> (whether it be an action, or a refu&s;al) <HI>is &s;in.</HI> But if you &s;hall &s;ay, that to impo&s;e &s;uch things upon you in the wor&s;hip and &s;ervice of God, as are in them&s;elves indifferent,
<PB N="5" REF="6">and not commanded by any law of God, is an infringement of your Chri&s;tian liberty; which you are bound not to yield or give way to, but to <HI>&s;tand fa&s;t in the liberty wherewith Chri&s;t hath made you free; Gal.</HI> 5.1. I an&s;wer, that if any Church &s;hould offer to impo&s;e the belief or practice of any thing, <HI>as an e&s;&s;ential part of Religion, and nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation,</HI> which God hath not particularly required; Again&s;t &s;uch an Impo&s;ition as this every Chri&s;tian ought to &s;tand up, and a&s;&s;ert his Chri&s;tian liberty; as the Apo&s;tles did again&s;t the Jewi&s;h Ceremonies, which &s;ome would have impo&s;ed upon the Church as ab&s;olutely nece&s;&s;ary to Salvation, <HI>Acts</HI> 15.1. And this is what the Apo&s;tle exhorts the Galatians unto; and is, as far as I can under&s;tand, the true notion of Chri&s;tian liberty, as it is &s;tated in the holy Scriptures: For if way &s;hould be given to &s;uch &s;ort of Impo|&s;itions as the&s;e; in proce&s;s of time &s;o many things (through the pride and vanity of &s;ome, and the ignorance and mi&s;takes of others) might come to be introduced into the Chri&s;tian Religion, as might render it (as the Jewi&s;h was) a yoke too heavy to be born, <HI>Acts</HI> 15.10. But to plead Chri&s;tian liberty as an exemption from &s;uch Laws and Rules which an E&s;tabli&s;hed Church &s;hall think fit to make a|bout things, in them&s;elves profe&s;&s;edly indifferent, and only for order and regularities &s;ake; as it has no foundation that I can find either in Scripture or Rea&s;on; &s;o the apparent con&s;equence of it mu&s;t be, not that decency and order which St. <HI>Paul</HI> directs the Church to provide for in the &s;ervice of God, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14.40. (which cannot be maintained without &s;ome e&s;tabli&s;hed Rules in circum&s;tantial mat|ters). But, on the contrary, that di&s;order and confu&s;ion which we may imagin mu&s;t be in &s;uch an A&s;&s;embly, where every man &s;hall e&s;teem it unlawful to demean him&s;elf according to any human pre|&s;cribed Rules; and where therefore every the mo&s;t ignorant per&s;on will be guided by nothing but the &s;ugge&s;tions of his own thoughts, in all &s;uch things as God him&s;elf has not particularly determined: For the avoiding of which confu&s;ion and irregularity, every &s;ettled Church has always found it nece&s;&s;ary to follow that direction which St. <HI>Paul</HI> long &s;ince gave; and to make and pre&s;cribe certain Rules for the e&s;tabli&s;hment of <HI>Decency and Order</HI> in their Congregations. And if our Liturgy be an infringement of Chri&s;tian Liberty, not only all other Churches are guilty of the &s;ame, but even your own
<PB N="6" REF="7">Directory, which impo&s;es &s;ome things which in them&s;elves are in|different, cannot be excu&s;ed from it. And if you &s;hall &s;ay that our Ceremonies are too numerous and burthen&s;ome, be&s;ides that others who perhaps may be as competent Judges, are of another opinion: If this were really &s;o, yet the mo&s;t it would amount to, would be only an inconvenience, (of which hereafter) and not a &s;in. And tho St. <HI>Au&s;tin</HI> complained of the number and burden of Ceremo|nies in his time; yet we never find that he looked upon that as any cau&s;e for &s;eparating from the E&s;tabli&s;hed Church. And la&s;tly, If you &s;hall &s;ay that many of our Rites and Ceremonies are altoge|ther unnece&s;&s;ary, and that the Governors of a Church ought not to lay unnece&s;&s;ary impo&s;itions upon the people; be&s;ides that what &s;ome may think unnece&s;&s;ary, others may judge to be expedient. Let us &s;uppo&s;e that our Governors were guilty of a fault in impo&s;ing &s;ome needle&s;s things upon us, yet will it not follow that our com|pliance even with &s;uch things, for Peace and Unity's &s;ake, would be any Sin, but rather, I think, a vertue: And therefore upon the whole, I cannot but conclude, that any good Chri&s;tian may, at lea&s;t very innocently, join him&s;elf to the Communion of our Church.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> Then if the Communion of our Church be Lawful and Innocent in its &s;elf; what imaginable rea&s;on can there be why you &s;hould refu&s;e to join with us in it? For &s;ure you do not think that every Man is at his free Liberty, either to join him&s;elf to the E&s;ta|bli&s;hed Church of a place, or to &s;et up a di&s;tinct Church for him|&s;elf, for this would be the way not only to divide, but crumble the Church; till the different fancies of Men &s;hould bring it to nothing. And if you &s;hall tell us that &s;ome of our Con&s;titutions are not &s;o conveniently &s;ettled, as they &s;hould be for promoting the Glory of God, and the Practice of Piety; Be&s;ides that there never was any Hu|man Appointment &s;o perfect as to be free from all defect and in|convenience; And that what may &s;eem inconvenient to one, may perhaps be thought convenient by another (there being &s;carce any particular Rules of convenience &s;o fixed, but what will be different|ly thought of by different Men, according to the diver&s;ity of their Apprehen&s;ions and Circum&s;tances). I de&s;ire to know whether one or more bare inconveniences, which yet are, or may be, free from &s;in, can be a &s;ufficient rea&s;on to &s;eparate from an E&s;tabli&s;hed
<PB N="7" REF="7">Church? And if &s;o, what Church is there upon the face of the Earth from which this principle will not ju&s;tifie a Divi&s;ion? It is indeed the duty of every Man &s;oberly and peaceably to &s;eek for the Rectifying, even any inconveniencies which he perceives to be in the Church: But &s;ince it is a Rule of Charity that it <HI>beareth all things, endureth all things, &s;uffereth long, is not ea&s;ily provoked,</HI> and <HI>&s;eeketh not her own,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 13, 4. <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Methinks every good Chri|&s;tian &s;hould be contented to bear, even with many inconveniencies (untill &s;uch time as God &s;hould touch the hearts of tho&s;e in who&s;e power it &s;hould be to remedy them) rather than occa&s;ion a Divi|&s;ion in the Church, which, be&s;ides the &s;in, is certainly a greater inconvenience than all tho&s;e which you can complain of put together. But if you &s;hall &s;ay that you find your &s;elves more Edified in Godli|ne&s;s and Piety by your own Meetings, than by frequenting our A&s;|&s;emblies; Not to a&s;cribe this to your prejudice and prepo&s;&s;e&s;&s;ion, nor to make any compari&s;ons which may &s;eem odious, or may tend to exa&s;perate; I &s;hall only tell you if this be a real truth, and not a bare fancy only; it may &s;eem to be a rea&s;on why you &s;hould hold &s;ome A&s;&s;emblies, be&s;ides the Parochial Congregations, for your mutual Edification, and to provoke others to emulation; which might be a means to promote a general reformation of all neglects or di&s;orders in the Church, (provided that nothing were therein &s;aid or done which might give any of your own members or others, a ju&s;t occa&s;ion to look upon you as a &s;eparate Church &s;et up in op|po&s;ition, and not in &s;ubordination to the e&s;tabli&s;h'd one). But what rea&s;on you can ground upon this for a down-right &s;epa|ration, and an utter refu&s;al of our Communion; I confe&s;s I am not able to find. But if you &s;hall &s;ay that you do not ab&s;olutely &s;eparate from us, nor utterly renounce our Communion, but that you &s;ometimes come to our publick Wor&s;hip, and receive the Sacra|ment of the Lord's Supper after our pre&s;cribed Form, which is by &s;ome of you a&s;&s;erted and pleaded for under the name of occa&s;ional Communion; I de&s;ire to be informed, if occa&s;ional Communion with us be lawful, why &s;hould con&s;tant Communion with us be thought unlawful? If it be a &s;in to join with us in God's Wor&s;hip and Sacraments, it ought not to be done &s;o much as once; but if it be no &s;in, why may it not be done always? And would it not be
<PB N="8" REF="8" MS="y">much more agreeable to the temper of Chri&s;tianity, and the Spirit of Peace and Unity, for you con&s;tantly to frequent our A&s;&s;emblies, who own you may lawfully do it, and to hold your own other Meet|ings either after or before ours; rather than by holding them ju&s;t at the &s;ame time with ours, to keep the people as much as you can, &s;trangers from our Congregations, than alienating their affections from us; cheri&s;hing an opinion in many of them, that our way of Wor&s;hip is utterly unlawful, and widening, or at lea&s;t keeping open, that breach which otherwi&s;e in a little time, would probably clo&s;e, and heal of it &s;elf.</P>
<P>The de&s;ign of what I have hitherto &s;aid, has been to lay the matter home to your Con&s;ciences, to per&s;wade you to embrace the Communion of our Church, and thereby &s;uper&s;ede the nece&s;&s;ity of a Toleration: But if all we can &s;ay or argue upon this matter will not prevail, then,</P>
<P><HI>Fifthly,</HI> I would gladly know what it is which you aim at, and propo&s;e to your &s;elves in an Act of Toleration? Is it only to have the liberty of Serving God in that way which you think to be be&s;t, and thereby to be free from per&s;ecution, and to go the readie&s;t way, as you &s;uppo&s;e, to Heaven, without let or mole&s;tation? Or is it to lay a foundation for the overthrow of the E&s;tabli&s;hed Church, and to get, in time, the whole Eccle&s;ia&s;tical and Civil Power into your own hands, as is already done by tho&s;e of your per&s;ua&s;ion in <HI>Scotland?</HI> If the latter of the&s;e be your de&s;ign, &s;ure you mu&s;t think us no le&s;s than fools and mad-men, if we give way to our own Overthrow &amp; Ruin; and do not give you all the Oppo&s;ition that po&s;&s;ibly we can; but if the former be only, and adequately your de&s;ire, why are you &s;o Zealous again&s;t the <HI>Sacramental Te&s;t</HI> (as it is called) as even to refu&s;e an Act of Toleration, rather then have this Clau&s;e in&s;erted in it, That no one &s;hall be capable of any Office, or Employment in the Com|mon-Wealth, who &s;hall not &s;o many times in the Year Receive the Holy Sacrament of the Lords Supper, according to the E&s;tabli&s;hed Form? I am &s;en&s;ible, That Men may have &s;trange Notions, Pre|judices and Scruples, in matters of Religion; and that what &s;eems to be the highe&s;t and cleare&s;t Rea&s;on to one Man, may not appear Convincing, or Concluding to another. And therefore, I do not wonder that good and well meaning Men, tho' mi&s;taken, &s;hould
<PB N="9" REF="8">be very earne&s;t for Liberty of Con&s;cience, to be clear from &s;uch Impo&s;itions as they think they cannot lawfully &s;ubmit to, and to have the freedom of &s;erving God in &s;uch a way as they apprehend may be plea&s;ing to him. But when Men are not contented with this, except they may have al&s;o a &s;hare in the Government, and be made capable of Employments of Power, Tru&s;t, and Profit; I think it is very apparent, That they de&s;ign and aim at &s;ome thing el&s;e be|&s;ides the Salvation of their Souls, and freedom from Per&s;ecution; And it becomes the Wi&s;dom of every Government, carefully to con|&s;ider even the remote, if probable, con&s;equences of what they do; and however, it may be fit to deal gently with tender Con&s;cien|ces, yet that State which &s;hall &s;eem to Encourage or &s;et up two &s;everal Parties, differing from each other in matters of Religion, (which &s;trangely Unites, or divides the Affections of Men) to make Factions one again&s;t the other, and to &s;tand in perpetual di|&s;tinct Oppo&s;ition and Competition one with the other for all the Places of Tru&s;t, Power, and Profit in the Common-Wealth; I believe will be thought by mo&s;t Wi&s;e Men to be out in its Poli|ticks.</P>
<P>But if I am told that this la&s;t Que&s;tion which I have put, contains in it a Fal&s;e and Uncharitable Sugge&s;tion again&s;t the <HI>Non-Confor|mi&s;ts;</HI> and that they have no manner of De&s;ign again&s;t the pre&s;ent E&s;tabli&s;hment of the Church, as is pretended, but only de&s;ire to &s;tand upon equal Terms with the re&s;t of His Maje&s;ty's Subjects as to Civil Matters; I an&s;wer that, &s;uppo&s;ing all this to be True; yet no one knows but their Succe&s;&s;ors, in the next Generation, may endeavour to advance a little farther than what is propo&s;ed by their Predece&s;&s;ors in this. And &s;ince the Presbyterian P<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">rty in the&s;e Kingdoms did in the late Wars of 1641. actually overthrow the E&s;tabli&s;hed Epi&s;copal Church, and have never yet Publickly Renounced tho&s;e Principles by which they then Acted, nor Te&s;ti|fied any Repentance for what they did. And &s;ince the Pre&s;|byterians of <HI>Scotland</HI> have now again Overturned the Epi&s;copal Church of that Kingdom; have we not all the Rea&s;on that can be to fear that, tho' our pre&s;ent <HI>Non-Conformi&s;ts</HI> may keep a kind and friendly Corre&s;pondence with us; becau&s;e we have been <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> lately joined again&s;t a common Enemy, yet in the next Generation
<PB N="10" REF="9" MS="y">Heats and Animo&s;ities may probably ari&s;e between their Succe&s;&s;ors and ours, which if not before hand carefully prevented, may tend to the di&s;turbance, or perhaps the Ruin both of Church and State: And ought not every Government to provide for Po&s;terity, as well as for the Pre&s;ent Generation? And thus have I Declared, or at lea&s;t Sugge&s;ted, my thoughts in this great Affair, with all the bre|vity and plainne&s;s that I could; and I hope with that Mildne&s;s which becomes a peaceable Man and a Chri&s;tian: How far what I have &s;aid may prevail upon any Man, I know not, but I hope that no one can take any Offence, either at what I have &s;aid, or at the manner wherein I have expre&s;&s;ed my &s;elf; and if I have mi&s;&s;ed of that Good which I de&s;igned, yet at lea&s;t it will be &s;ome &s;atisfaction to me, to think that I have done no hurt; and whil&s;t I have been Pleading for Unity, have &s;aid nothing which &s;hould tend to the breach of Charity.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
