TIME was, when this, and all other Scriptures, which teach us our Duties to Superiors in Church, and State, have been treated as Malignants; being miserably rack'd, and tortur'd; to make 'em speak the Language of a Common-wealth. And that Reforma­tion so much talk'd of, ought to have be­gun with the Reformation of this, and divers other Texts, which stand so stubborn, and irreconcile­able Enemies, to all opposition of Kings, and Monarchical Governments. I have met with them, who have dealt with this very Scripture, as some would perswade the Devil doth with the Bodies of Witches, molding 'em to the forms of Beasts, that in terrible Appearances, they may infatuate, and destroy.

There is one in his Appeal to Fairfax, and his Army, look­ing on this place as a Spy, that came to discover the naked­ness of his Pamphlet; deals with it, as Hanun did with David's Ambassadors; shave its beard, and cut its clothes to its buttocks, then send it away with Shame, and Ignominy. He flyes to the Greek [...], which literally rendered is, to every Humane Creature; and because it follows, whether to the King; he concludes that the King is an Humane Crea­ture, that is, as he explains it, a Creature of the People, who [Page 2] have Power over the work of their own hands, and may un­make him at pleasure; by stripping him of that Regal Autho­rity, and Power, which they gave him. Much like his gloss on Rom. 13. 1. Let every soul be subject to the higher Powers, i. e. saith he, to the Lower House, viz. the Commons; who are the Fountain and Original of all Power, whence that of Kings, and Nobles do spring; and, Non dat, quod non habet, it can­not give more than it hath it self, and what it doth give, it may recal again. Principles fit to debauch the most wretched Libels; and suited to the mouths of none, but a Scotch Carge­lyte: and so meet to be spoke in no place, as at Scaffolds, and Gibbets, where they come to receive a just Recompence for such confounding, and destructive Tenents.

But it is a common rule in expounding Scripture, that that cannot be the meaning of one Text, which is contradictory to another: But this sense is contradictory, not only to many Particulars; but to the concurrent Doctrine, and Practice of Christ, his Apostles, and all Apostolick Men. Nor can that be a due, and regular Deduction from a Text, which directly contradicts the very scope, and design of the place, it is de­duced from: but such is the case before us; For it is the very business, and design of this, and the following Verses, to ingage our Submission to Every Ordinance of man; whether to the King, as Supreme; or to them, that are sent by him: Therefore to conclude from hence, that Kings may be resisted, and deposed; makes the same Scripture to contradict it self, viz. That we must submit, and yet may resist 'em: obey, and yet depose 'em.

Therefore we must seek for some more Natural, and ho­nest Explication: [...], that is, [...], to Order, and Government; or to that disposition of Civil Government, which is in every Nation; including all the particular Ordi­nances, Statutes, and Constitutions of a Society. And it is called an Humane Creature; Quòd ab hominibus ordinetur, & constituatur; because it is ordain'd, or appointed by Men: but [Page 3] yet not without a Divine Sanction, in that God himself Com­mands us to be subject to it.

Now Monarchy is the first, and most Noble Government in the World; being founded originally in Families; the first of all Societies. For Monarch, as the word imports, is the sole Governor in a Society: and therefore is agreeable to a Pater­familias, a King, and an Emperor, who have in themselves the same Power over their Subjects; so far as they are not limited by a Superior Power, as the Paterfamilias by a King, and Kings by an Emperor; which limitation so far as it reaches, destroys the Notion of Monarch in the lesser, and transfers it to the greater. Where there is only one Family, or if many, so far as one is independent, so far the Paterfamilias, the Father, or Head of it, is a Monarch. Where there is a col­lection of several Families into one Body, the chief is a Mo­narch still, but yet disterenced from a Paterfamilias by the Title of King. And where several Kingdoms are United, and Subject to one Head; that Head hath the Title of Monarch in common with the other; but is distinguished from both by the Title of Emperor. Whence it is said of Nimrod, Gen. 10. 10. that the beginning of his Kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar: implying that the Families of those places being United under him, made up a Kingdom; and gave him the Title, and Dignity of a King. And at the Confusion of Babel, when the World was divided into many Bodies, according to the number of Tongues, and Languages; every Captain was really a King, or sole Ruler of that Body. Whence we read Gen. 14. 9. of Nine Kings joyned together in one Battel. The degeneracy of which Government into Aristocracy, and base Democracy, was a Creature, not existent from the beginning, but arose, like the Mule, from the Unnatural conjunction of an Horse, and an Ass: and scarce ever obtain'd in any place, but by a Re­bellion. Therefore it was, perhaps, from the Nature of the Government, as well as that it was at this time the Govern­ment [Page 4] of the World; that St. Peter proceeds from Government it self, viz. the Ordinance of man, to the Form, and Modus of it, which is Monarchical, to the King as Supreme—Had some Men as much to Plead for Commonwealth, Free State, or Par­liament, they would long since have boasted the jus Divinum of 'em.

2. Having found the meaning of this Ordinance of man; we shall observe the Command to submit to it; for it is spoke Im­peratively [...], Be ye subject: But we have no Precept, or Example to the contrary; and therefore must yield either Active, or Passive Obedience. Which is agreeable to the Do­ctrine, and Practice of our Blessed Saviour; who paid Tribute, rather than make a Disturbance: He submitted to the High Priest, and Jewish Synedrium; to an Heathen Pilat, and the most unjust, and unreasonable Sentence. This was not only taught by St. Peter, and St. Paul, under Nero, the Monster of Mankind; but was sealed by their Blood under the same Emperor. To this did the Fathers, and Primitive Churches all agree; whose steps the Church of England follows both in Doctrine, and Practice. This is so great, and evident a part of Christian Religion, that it was as Catholick as the Church it self, till first Popery, and from thence Presbytery, began to appear, and disturb the World.

This is imply'd in the very Nature, and Reason of Society; which is an Union, or imbodying of particulars for mutual preservation. For this very Union is it self a tacit, and mutual Compact to be governed by the Laws, and Rules of that Society. The making, and execution of which, must be intrusted into a few hands; and in case any thing shall be ordain'd, or imposed, that is unlawful in it self, or destru­ctive of the first ends of Society; there is no Remedy, but either Patience, or a quiet remove into some other Society, where those Evils cannot reach 'em; even as the Members of a Family, as Children, Servants, or others; must conform to the Rules of that Family, or remove. Whence the same [Page 5] word [Honor] doth import the Duties, we owe both to Civil Magistrates, and Natural Parents. Thus our Saviour ordered the Disciples, that when they were Persecuted in one City, they should fly to another; and not look there to complain of Grievances, to make Parties, and Plots upon the Govern­ment, indeavoring to secure the best things, viz. Religion, and Property, by the worst Methods, viz. Rebellion, and Blood.

Nor is there any other Doctrine, that gives either Magi­strates, or People, any security of their Religion, Estates, or Lives. For leave but any hole for refusals, resistance, or self­defence, as some call it, to creep in at; and you give but an opportunity to every State-Mountebank, and Knavish Politi­cian, to put tricks upon the People, in perswading 'em to a necessity of slighting, or resisting the Laws, either for the removal, or prevention of those Evils, which are supposed to licence such refusals, or resistance. By which means all Go­vernment would be set upon hinges; and Men would quickly do only what they have a mind to do: and a Society would be more dangerous, than many wild, and ungoverned Parts of the World. Inquire of this, and the Nations about us; Examine the Times, that are past; and you will find, that this Doctrine of resistance hath made more Differences, Wars, and Bloodshed; than all the Controversies among Princes, in the like space of time, have done. What Calamities, and Deva­slations, may we then imagine there would have been, and would yet be, had Men liberty upon any account whatever, to slight, and resist the Government? Therefore the God of Peace, Unity, and Order, hath given us such Rules, and Pre­cepts of Universal Obedience, that there is no room left for any reasonable Plea to the contrary.

We must therefore submit either Actively, or Passively:

1. Actively, by doing the thing commanded, where it is not contrary to any Law, or Ordinance of God. For God bids us submit to every Ordinance, without exception; and [Page 6] therefore to every thing, which himself hath not forbidden. And if any Plead a Prohibition, it must not be from illogical Inferences, sound of Words, and misapplication of Phrases; but from a Rule as plain, and satisfactory, as the Command. And if this be produced, yet it can licence,

2. Only to a Passive Submission, in suffering the Penalty of Non-obedience.

Now we have here a Precept directed to us from my Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury, as one of our Parishes is under this Jurisdiction: and another from my Lord Bishop of London; as the other Parish is a Member of his Lordship's Diocess. Which Orders even this very Text doth oblige us to observe, and do; unless you can find any Evil in the things com­manded; in which case you are quietly to submit to those Penalties, with which the Law shall punish your Refusals, or Neglects. For your Information, and Satisfactions in so im­portant concerns; I shall observe in these Letters, these three things,

• 1. What is required of you,
• 2. What of the Churchwardens, and
• 3. What of me.

It is required of you,

• 1. That you frequent the Prayers of the Church.
• 2. That you send your Children, and Servants to be Ca­techized. And,
• 3. That you receive the Sacrament of the Supper.

The First of these I intend to discourse on another Sub­ject: And therefore begin,

1. With Catechising: where we have,

• 1. The thing in Command, which is Catechising.
• 2. The Parties who, Children, and Servants; and
• 3. The Persons, that must Prepare, and send 'em, and they are Parents, Masters, and Mistresses.

1. It is required that we Catechise,

[Page 7] A thing, as some think, founded on that of St. Paul to Tim. 2 Ep. 1. 13. Hold fast the form of sound words, which thou hast heard of me. Which [...], or Exemplar, some have taken to be a System, or short Catechetical Discourse on the fundamental Points of Religion. However it is certain, it was a thing very early, and Universally Practised in the Christian Church. And Origen, with other Learned Men, condescended to this work. There was an Order of Pro­fessors called the [...], or Catechumens, who were the Persons, that learned these Catechises. Indeed we sometimes find in the Fathers, and Church-Historians; that these Cate­cumens are described to be Christians by Prafession, but not yet Baptiz'd. Which sort were either Children of Heathen, who were not received into the Church by Baptism, till instructed in the Christian Religion; which is the Practice of our Church in the case of Jews, Mahometans, &c. and is agreeable to our Saviour's rule, Mat. 28. 19. that all Nations, being then Gentile, must be taught, or discipled, before Bap­tism: Or else the Children of those Christians, who were newly converted themselves, and defer'd Baptism, till Easter, or Whitsontide, which, in some times, and places, were the stated Seasons of Baptism: Or of such, who delayed it, till the time of Death, as many did out of a conceit, that Sins after Baptism are unpardonable. But the Children even of Christians, whether Baptized, or not, were obliged to this exercise. And the Sons of Constantine the Emperor were put out to Masters, and Tutors, to be train'd up in the Principles of Christian Religion. Whence it appears,

2. That the Persons to be Catechifed were Neophytes, or young Professors; which among us are Children, or younger Servants, as my Lord of Canterbury expresses it; or Children, and Apprentices, as my Lord of London words it. Or Persons, whose Age, and Condition, may suppose 'em little acquainted with the Doctrine of the Gospel: and the less they are so, still the more need of this instruction. Chtechism is in order [Page 8] to Baptism in the Children of Infidels, who are yet unbaptiz'd: but it is in order to Confirmation, and the Sacrament of the Supper in the Children of Christians, who are baptiz'd al­ready, therefore quoere, whether not only those under Six­teen; but Persons of all Ages whatever, that have not recei­ved Confirmation, and the Sacrament, may not in strictness be required to this Exercise? The Rubrick obliges all Children, Servants, and Apprentices, who have not yet learn'd the Ca­techism; without determining the Age: but because the Law obliges those above Sixteen to receive the Sacrament, there­fore it is presum'd these Servants are under Sixteen: and ac­cordingly our Orders command those above to the Sacrament; and consequently those called to be Catechised must be pre­sumed under that term.

3. The Persons required to prepare, and send 'em, are Pa­rents, Masters, or Mistresses. And the Reasons are, because you have both a commanding Power over 'em, and also a trust reposed in you that way; it being your Duties, not only to feed, and cloth their Bodies; but to provide things wholsom, and necessary for their Souls too. Parents, and Masters, stand as Priests to their own Families; where they are to perform all the Duties, and Offices of Christian Reli­gion; those only excepted, which are restrain'd to the Publick Ministry, as Preaching, Administration of Sacraments, &c. Though they be yours, yet they stand related to God: he saith you have born 'em to him, Ezek. 16. 20. and v. 21. thou hast slain my Children. Whence he aggravates the Sin of ill Education, and abuse of 'em from this very Topick, the re­lation they stood in to him—Thou hast taken thy Sons, and thy Daughters, whom thou hast born unto me, and these hast thou Sacrificed —these hast thou debauched by wicked Opi­nions, and Prophaness of Life: Or left disposed to every evil way, and work, for want of better Principles. As they are com­mitted to your care; so he will require what you have done with that Depositum, as one calls it, which he hath put into [Page 9] your hands. Whence Joshua undertakes both for himself, and Family, Chap. 24. 15. as for me, and my house we will serve the Lord. For which causes, as well as for the Perswasive Argu­ments from Natural Affections, even Constantine the Great, as Eusebius relates, De Vitâ Constant. lib. 4. cap. 51. not only divided his Empire amongst his three Sons, but took care to inrich 'em with a better Portion, viz. of Divine, and Spiritual things; being a Tutor, and Example to 'em himself, [...] walking before 'em in the Paths of Virtue, and Religion: and he adds, [...]: He provided 'em the best Masters, and Tutors. You are as Kings, and Priests to 'em, having the Power to Command, Teach, and Excommunicate, those, that are stubborn, and impure; whence both God, and Man require, that at your own Peril, you see those under your Charge, do perform those Duties, that do lye upon them­selves. For which cause David did resolve Psal. 101. 7. that not a wicked man should dwell in his house.

And indeed, they, that do not do so, fall short of that great Duty Prov. 22. 6. of training up a Child in the way he should go. And Eph. 6. 4. of bringing them up in the nurture, and admonition of the Lord.

Such are worse, than the very Heathen, who sent their Children to Isocrates, and others, to be taught Moral Wisdom, which was their Divinity, and fall short of a Plutarch, who hath left us a Tract [...], about the right Edu­cation of Children.

Such leave 'em unable to judge of Doctrines, whether they be of God: and therefore lyable, like the Apostles Children, to be toss'd to, and fro, and carried about with every wind of Doctrine. And this is one reason, as some think, why the Church of Rome loses few, but gains many Proselytes, viz. because she is more careful, than others, to Catechize, and settle Youth in her Faith, and Principles.

[Page 10] Therefore we have here an Ordinance from the most Reve­rend Fathers of our Church, that commands only an antece­dent Duty; a thing founded on Eternal Reason: on Scripture, and the Laws of the Land. A Duty so plain, and so Natural, to train up Children in Virtue, and all laudible Knowledges, that the very Heathen did Court, and Practise it: and as Plu­tarch hath it, [...], [...], A good Education out-lives Death, travels beyond the Grave, and abides with us through all the Tracts of Eternal Ages: and therefore being the greatest, and most lasting good, we can do 'em, even common Nature prompts us to it. There can be therefore no objection against the thing it self; the Matter lies only in reference to that Catechism, injoyn'd by the Church. Which some object against, upon the account, it supposes Children baptized with Sureties; which they cannot away with. This Point we will fully answer, and then consider the Parts of the Catechism it self.

1. They plead that Sureties undertake more than they can perform; therefore they can neither make use of them, nor teach a Catechism, which supposes their use.

We Answer,

That the Primitive Christians, whose Faith, and Martyr­doms, were famous in the World; thought no such Matters: for then Infants had their Sponsores or Susceptores, and Suscep­trices, Undertakers, or Sureties; and because 'twas thought there was a Spiritual Relation arising between the Parents, and Sureties; therefore the Child called 'em God-father, &c. that is, Father-in-God; and the ancient Saxons Godsibs, by cor­ruption Gossips, Sib signifying akin, implying that they were akin, in God. Now these answered, in behalf of the Child, the very same Questions that are used by our Church, viz. Doest thou renounce the Devil, &c. DoEst thou Believe in God the Father—the Son—the Holy Ghost?—This was the Universal Practice in the time of Tertul. Now those Men, who for a good Conscience, suffered so cruel Persecutions, that [Page 11] Lactan. de Just. cryes out, Quis Caucasus! Quae India! What place, the most fruitful in Monsters, ever bred such cruel and savage Beasts, as their Persecutors were! yet never cen­sured this part of Baptism, as a sinful addition, or corruption of this Institution. But because some Men have cheap thoughts of Antiquity, I will consider the thing it self, and argue from the very Nature of it, as,

• 1. What it is they Undertake, and
• 2. For how long.

1. They undertake that the Child shall renounce the Devil, and all his works; and believe God's Holy Word, and keep his Commandments. Whence it follows, Doest thou in the Name of this Child renounce the Devil, &c. Doest thou believe in God, &c. Wilt thou be Baptized, &c. Wilt thou obediently keep God's Holy Will, and Commandments, &c. Which is but the first Matter explain'd, and put into the form of Questions. Whence the Child saith in the Catechism, that they did Vow Three things in his Name, viz.

• 1. That he should renounce the Devil, &c.
• 2. That he should believe the Articles of the Christian Faith.
• 3. That he should keep God's Holy Will, and Command­ments, &c.

The meaning of which is only this, that the Child shall be brought up a Christian, and not a Jew, or Heathen: and that it shall take this Vow, and Profession upon it self. Therefore in the Exhortation to the Sureties after Baptism, the whole Charge is comprised in Two things,

1. That they shall teach the Child what a solemn Vow, Promise, and Profession, it hath there made by them: the Matter of which Vow is contain'd in the ingagement above, viz. That it shall renounce the Devil—Believe the Articles of the Christian Faith, and keep the Commands: as a means to which, they are directed.

2. To Call upon it to hear Sermons, and provide that it may learn the Creed, the Lord's Prayer, and Ten Command­ments: [Page 12] which things, viz. the Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Com­mandments, do comprise all the Matter of this Promise; To which it is added,

3. That when the Child can say these things, and the Church Catechism (which Catechism I therefore presume the Sureties are obliged to see it learn) they shall bring it to the Bishop to be Confirm'd.

Now here is the whole Matter of Suretiship: which is confessed by those very Men, that Dispute against it. For they sometimes Plead, that the reason of Sureties in the First Ages of Christianity, where there was a mixture of Christians, and Gentiles together, was that there might be a sufficient number ingaged to see the Child brought up a Christian. Therefore, according to them, the bringing up the Child in the Profession of the Gospel, doth comprise the whole burthen of Suretiship.

Then the time this Obligation lyes upon the Sureties, is,

2. Till the Child be of Age to take it upon it self; as in the Publick Baptism: which is at Confirmation, as anon.

We will now see how, and when, the Child takes this Vow from his Sureties upon himself; and that is,

1. At the very learning of these things, for he declares in the Catechism, that he looks upon himself bound to believe, and do, as they have Promised for him; and ingages, that by God's help he will do so: And

2. At Confirmation, where the Bishop asks the Children, and that in order to Confirmation, Do you here in the Presence of God, and of this Congregation, renew the solemn Promise, and Vow, that was made in your Name at your Baptism; ratifying, and confirming the same in your own Persons; and acknowledg­ing your selves bound to believe, and to do, all those things, which your God-fathers, and God-mothers, then undertook for you? To which the answer is, I do.

It is evident then, that all that charge, which the Church laid upon the Sureties at the Child's Baptism; the Church [Page 13] takes off from the same Sureties at the Child's Confirmation. And because Confirmation of the Child is a discharge of the Sureties; it follows, that the fitting this Child for, and the bringing him to Confirmation, doth comprise the whole Du­ty of Sureties. And the Rubrick at the end of the Catechism tells us, that the Child shall be confirm'd, when it can say the Creed, Lord's Prayer, and Ten Commandments, and answer the other Questions in that Catechism: which is adaequate to the Charge given. Ergo the teaching the Child those things, and the bringing him duely to Confirmation, is a Plenary and to­tal Discharge of the Sureties.

But it will be farther objected, that the Sureties ingage, and the Catechism doth express it, that the Child shall keep the Commandments, and walk in the same all the days of its life. Ergo the Obligation seems to lye on the Surety so long as the Child doth live.

We answer, That that Clause respects the Nature of the Baptismal Vow; the Covenant the Child makes with God by its Sureties at Baptism; and by it self at Confirmation; but doth not respect the ingagement of the Surety any farther, than that the Child shall take this Vow upon it self; whereof this of Perseverance is a part.

But in case the Child be uncapable, or will not learn; or is not suffered by Parents, Guardians, or Masters; or that Pro­vidence removes the Parties so far asunder, that there is no means, or opportunity left, of performing such ingage­ments; the will is accepted for the deed: for God requires no more of any man than what he is able to do: But where Men have any reasonable prospect of such Impediments, they ought not to ingage: but an honest ingagement is not made Sin by an accidental impossibility of Performance. But if Parents shall, as in Duty bound, do this of themselves, the Sureties have no more upon 'em, but to see that the thing be done.

[Page 14] 2. It is objected, That Heathenism still abounding in the Christian World, the Church required Sureties, lest one, or two Persons dying, the Child might fall into Gentile hands, and be brought up as such: But now amongst us Heathenism is rooted out, therefore the reason of the thing ceasing, the thing it self ought to cease too; as it did in that case of ab­staining from things Strangled, and from Blood.

We answer,

1. This runs upon a false Supposition, and is no better than a fallacy called Petitio Principii; which is a taking for granted what ought to be proved, For the danger of Heathenism was not the only reason of Sureties. For those first Ages of Chri­stianity, did ground it much upon that Text, 1 Pet. 3. 21. where he calls Baptism an Answer of a good Conscience toward God. Whence they conjectured, he hinted at Interrogatories, and Responses, in that Office. How truly conjectured is be­side my Business to inquire; it is enough to the Objector, that there were other Reasons, than what he assigns.

2. Though the Prosession of Heathenism is not found a­mongst us, yet the Practice of Heathenish Debaucheries doth abound: and this Religious Education of Children was de­sign'd to keep 'em, not so much from the Name, as from the Thing.

3. Suretiship was also design'd as a fence against those Schisms, and Heresies, that perplexed the Church; which things obtain amongst us, perhaps, as much as in those an­tient Times, and Places, where Suretiship was never scrupled. Therefore the reason of Sureties is as great, as Ever: and consequently may be as profitably, and prudently continued, as at first used.

3. Object. Some think it absurd, that the Charge is not given to the Parents; but that others are thrust into their place; and bound to do those Duties, which themselves owe their Children.

[Page 15] Answ. This is a Plea merely from Ignorance; for Parents have an antecedent Charge laid upon 'em both by God, and Nature; which they stand as much bound to perform, as if there had been no Surety at all. Therefore the Church layes the Charge upon others, who had none before: to the end, that they may not exclude, or excuse the Parents, but be joyn'd with them, for the more certain, and easie carrying on of the work. The Parents never matter how many Underta­kers the Child hath in Temporal concerns; and that they think otherwise in Spirituals, must be from Ignorance, or a mighty Prepossession, or from too easie, and indifferent thoughts of Religion it self.

This is a very Christian, and charitable Work, to be Guides to the Blind, Teachers to the Simple, and Directors of Poor, and (perhaps) neglected Infants, into the Paths of Truth, and Life. By this means you may turn some to Righteousness; and thereby increase your own Rewards for Ever.

It tends mightily to the interest, and advance of Religion; for did Sureties perform their Vows to God (and it is their Sin, if they do not) we should find it would quickly give a mighty check to the growing madness of the Age.

But in fine, because Suppositions grant nothing, let us sup­pose there may be still some evil in the having Sureties; yet according to Mr. Baxter's resolution of a like case, that suppo­sed Evil cannot affect the Children, or Parents. For some of the Inhabitants of Daventre in Northamptonshire, as them­selves have confessed to me, inquiring of Mr. Baxter what he thought of the Cross in Baptism; or of signing Children with it? He answered, Baptism is a necessary Duty, and in the Church of England we have all the Essential parts of it: Now, saith he, I bring my Child, as the Law Commands, to be baptiz'd; but if there be any sinful, or unnecessary Additions, without which I cannot have Baptism; those Additions are nothing to me; I de­sire not them, but simply Baptism; what evil there may be in any Additions, being they are imposed, and not my choice, lyes upon [Page 16] the Church, that Commands, and on the Minister, that uses 'em. Therefore if we consider either the thing it self, or Mr. Bax­ter's sense, Parents have not a sufficient excuse for refusing to have their Children Catechised, because the Catechism injoyn'd supposes they are baptized by Sureties.

Whence we come to consider the Catechism it self; and I doubt not, but I may speak it, not only short, but easie, most comprehensive, and every way most sufficient to it's end. For,

1. This Catechism teaches the Nature of our Baptismal Vow, and Covenant; which is to renounce the Devil, and all his works, the Pomps, and Vanity of this wicked World; and all the sinful Lusts of the Flesh; to believe all the Articles of the Chri­stian Faith; and to keep God's holy Will, and Commandments all the dayes of our life. Where the whole Duty of Man is com­prised in a few words; and suited to the Capacities of the meanest Learner.

2. It teaches the Apostles Creed; whose Antiquity is such, that some have thought it was made by the Apostles them­selves; and was call'd [...] from [...], every one of 'em being supposed to cast in his part toward the composing the whole. It is observed from the Greek, and Latin Fathers, that [...], or Traditio Apostolorum, was a Tra­dition supposed to come from some Apostle: but [...], or traditio Apostolica, was only a very ancient Tra­dition; which came, if not from some Apostle, yet from some other near those Times. Now this hath been usually called the Creed of the Apostles; and so Dr. D. in his Greek Version of our Liturgy, calls it [...] but whether with respect to this Observation, I cannot say; or how Uni­versally true it may be, is not to be determined by any, that have not made their Observations in numerous instances of this kind. The least we can make of it is (and no man will go to prove any more) that it is a very ancient one, else, we may presume, it had never been placed by any in the Apostles [Page 17] times; we can trace it very far; and find it Universally used in the first Ages of Christianity. It was used by the followers of the Presbyterian Directory, and the Assemblies Catechism; nor do I remember any Objection then against it, but in that Article, viz. the Descent into hell; which they wish was either altered, or left out. Yet the same Men own that descent Vir­tually, though not Locally; therefore according to them, that Article is true, and wants only an Explication.

Now the Ancient, and Universal use of it, speaks the esteem, it hath ever had in the Christian World: and the excellent choice our Catechism hath made in teaching this, rather than that of Nice, or Athanasius; which are longer, and not so suited to every Capacity. And though the Presbyterian Par­ty cavill'd at the Descent into hell, yet they used this Creed, rather than the Nicoean, whose Antiquity is great, and which speaks of no such Descent at all: which is an Argument of their higher Approbation of the other Parts of it. Here, in the fewest words, and plainest way, are taught the great My­steries of our Faith: what we are to believe concerning God the Father, who made the World: God the Son, who hath re­deemed all Mankind: and God the Holy Ghost, who sanctifies all the elect people of God. Which makes up a short, but yet a most plain, and excellent System of all the Credenda, or Mat­ters of pure Faith.

3. It teaches what we are to do, and that from the Deca­logue, or Ten Commandments, which is the sum, and breviary of all Morality. This is the standing Rule given to the World. The Lex nata, as Cicero calls it, the Law born with us, and imprinted on the hearts of all Men by Nature, was a Counterpart of this: All the Moral Discourses of Moses and the Prophets, were but Comments upon this Text: the Sermon of Christ upon the Mount, and the other practical Parts of the Gospels, and Epistles; are but an Explication, and a Vindica­tion of this, from the false Glosses of the Pharisees, and the Corruptions of the Gnosticks.

[Page 18] Therefore we have here the sum of all Practical Religion, and as it is divided into two Tables; so our Catechism gives us the most short, plain, and close Explication of each, under those two Heads, viz. Our Duty toward God, and our Duty to­ward our Neighbor, that can well be comprised in so few words.

4. This Catechism teaches the Lord's Prayer; which was given not only a Pattern for us to Pray by; but as a Form for us to use. Therefore he taught it the Disciples twice, the first time was Mat. 6. 9. And some time after, as St. Luke re­lates, Chap. 11. 2. they come to him again, Master teach us to pray; as if they looked upon that short form suited indeed to the Infancy of their Discipleship, but not so fitting, now they were taught farther, and came more near the stature of Men; but he gives 'em the very same again; a tacit reproof of their ignorance, and reach after Novels. And if we only suppose he might design it as a form; he could not well have express'd himself more aptly to that purpose; for Mat. 6. 9. [...], sic, vel ita orate, Pray thus, viz. in these very words; which is better rendered so, than as our Tran­slation doth, viz. after this manner, which looks somewhat like a Geneva cast, as if it was intended only as a Pattern to form our conceived Prayers by. And Luk. 11. 2. when ye Pray, [...], &c. say, Our Father, &c. which seems a confining 'em to those very words; as well as to that matter. Indeed those Men must think very highly of them­selves, that look upon that Prayer, which was composed by Christ himself, and given to the Twelve, whom he had cho­sen, and was training up for the Discipleing all Nations; to be fit only for Children, if for any; but to stand much below their own improvements. We do not read, that ever our Sa­viour made use of any other Prayer himself, unless some short Ejaculation, or particular Petition, suited to a present exigence, as when in his Agony, and bloody Sweat, If it be possible, let this cup pass from me. And though there may be many Rea­sons [Page 19] given, why Publick Service ought to be much longer; yet our Church uses this very form, in every distinct Part of her Service. Here then Youth is taught a Prayer, short, plain comprehensive, and suited to the Divine Will, being given us by the Son of God, and Captain of our Salvation, who best knew how, and what we ought to pray for; a Prayer suited to all Persons, Times, and Places; and therefore given for the use of all Posterities; which none but gifted Men, and Pha­risaical Spirits, who love much babling, ever yet despised. And this our Catechism doth explain in a few words, and to the Capacities of every Learner; in the Answer to this Question, What desirest thou of God in this Prayer?

5. We have the Explication of the Nature of a Sacrament, that it is an outward, and visible sign of an inward, and Spiritual Grace, given to us, &c. Whence it descends to the two Sacra­ments severally. And tells you, that the outward, and Visi­ble sign, or form in Baptism, is Water, wherein the Person is baptiz'd in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and that the inward, and Spiritual grace, is a death unto Sin, and a new birth unto Righteousness, &c.

Hence it descends to the Sacrament of the Supper, and tells you, that the outward part, or sign is, Bread and Wine, &c. And that the inward part or thing signified is, the Body, and Blood of Christ, which are verily, and indeed taken, and received by the faithful in the Lord's Supper. By which the Child is led from the conceits both of Transubstantiation, and Consubstan­tiation at once. For,

1. It tells you that in the Sacrament, and therefore after Consecration, or Blessing, for till then it is not a Sacrament; there are two distinct Parts, viz. the sign, which is Bread, and Wine; and the thing signified, which is the Body, and Blood of Christ; therefore the one is not changed into the other; but remain distinct still; because the sign, and thing signified, while such, cannot be the same.

[Page 20] 2. It saith that this Body, and Blood of Christ is taken, and received by the faithful; which is spoke exclusively of all others: but if the Bread, and Wine, was really changed into the Body, and Blood of Christ; or if they did consist together, and re­main in, and under the outward Elements; although still di­stinct; yet this Body, and Blood of Christ, would then be verily, and indeed, taken, and received, by every Communicant, and not by the faithful only. Ergo according to our Catechism, there is neither Transubstantiation, nor Consubstantiation in this Sacrament.

And in the last Answer, you have a full, and most excellent account of what is required of a worthy Communicant; and that is, to examine themselves, whether they repent them truly of their former Sins; stedfastly purposing to lead a new life; have a lively faith in God's Mercy through Christ, with a thankful re­membrance of his Death; and be in Charity with all men.

Here then are Homer's Iliads in a Nutshel; a little Body, and System of Divinity, that comprises the Substance of mighty Volumes! Here the deepest Points, and most mysterious parts of our Faith, are by easie, and familiar Expressions, brought down to puerile Capacities! Whereas the Assemblies Catechism is longer, and runs upon second Notions, which do themselves suppose some preceding Knowledges, and therefore Children need an Explication of 'em; and is burthened with numerous Quotations, which are apt to confound, and tire a young be­ginner.

This then ought to be prefer'd for its own sake, and excel­lency; which lyes both in the Matter it contains; and it's suita­bleness, and sufficiency to it's end, if it had not been injoyn'd by any Ordinance of Man. But since it is so, we have a double Obligation, first from it self, and then from the Authority, that Commands it. Therefore if we refuse, we sin against both at once; and in one Act we are doubly guilty. And certainly Men have the less reason to do so, because this very injun­ction doth yet leave room for every one to teach another at home.

[Page 21] 2. It is required of you, that you receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper. The Persons under obligation are all above Sixteen, and both the Canon and Rubrick, say, that they shall receive at least three times in the year; whereof Easter shall be one. There are several Statutes, that oblige the Subject to this Duty: which Laws the People have made themselves in, and by their Representatives; therefore they can no more complain of the thing, than they can, that they have had Par­liaments; or at least such, that have brought 'em under this Obligation.

Nor is this founded merely on Humane Laws, but on a Di­vine Institution and Command of Heaven; it being the last Precept our Saviour gave his Disciples, before he was made an offering for Sin; Do this in remembrance of me. Therefore the observance of it must be a means to Salvation, else he lays a needless burthen upon us: and if Nature doth nothing in vain, we cannot imagine that the God of Nature should give us Laws to no purpose. If men may be safe under the custo­mary neglect of this Sacrament, why not of the other? And if of these, why not of any other Rules, and Precepts of the Gospel, since they all come with a Divine Authority impress'd upon 'em? They are his Laws, one as well as another.

But some may plead from the Nature of the things them­selves; that the Matter of some Commands is intrinsecally good, and necessary; and therefore was a Duty even ante­cedent to a Divine Precept: but this is a pure Positive, that hath no goodness in it self; and therefore had not been a Duty, unless injoyn'd; and consequently though they are all Commanded, yet they are not all alike obliging: because the one hath a double Obligation, viz. both from it's own Nature, and Precept too; the other from Precept only.

We answer, that some will not allow the two Sacraments to be purely Positive, but that they are founded partly on Nature, and Reason. But suppose 'em such, and I cannot see the advantage, they can make of it. For pure Positives under [Page 22] the Law, such as was Circumcision were as severely punish­ed, as Transgressions in things morally Good, and Evil. For he, that was not Circumcised, was to be cut off from his People. And what reason can be given, why the neglect of Positives under the Gospel should not be severely punished, as well as under the Law? Why the neglect, or contempt of Baptism should not be a Sin now, as well as that of Circumcision was then? And this of the Sacrament, as well as that of the Pass­over? The Author to the Hebrews doth argue it to our advan­tage, Chap, 2. 2, 3. If the word spoken by Angels was stedfast, and every Transgression receiv'd a just recompence of reward; how shall we escape, if we neglect so great Salvation, which—was spoken to us by the Lord—? As the Son of God is greater, than a Created Spirit, so the Transgression of the Law given by him, is a greater Sin, than a Transgression of the Law given by the other, and if it be so as to the whole, it must be so as to the like parts of each Dispensation. Therefore a man hath but little cause to hope he may safely neglect a Po­sitive institution of Christ, when a like neglect was so severely punished under the Law. There is a contempt of Divine Au­thority in the neglect of a Positive, as well as there is of a Moral Duty: and every Contempt, and Disobedience must have a due recompence of reward.

This is the nearest Communion, we have with God in this World; therefore the neglect of it, is the greatest neglect of God himself. It is a means of conveighing Grace, and Life to the Soul; which is strengthned, and refreshed by the Body, and Blood of Christ, as the Body is by the Bread, and Wine: and a contempt of the means, is a contempt of the thing it self. For which reasons, as well as others, the Duty is great, and indispensable.

But I presume few of us here are against the Duty it self, so much as against the Modus of it, according to the Use of the Church of England. Therefore I shall answer the most Common, and material Objections, I have met with; that [Page 23] by giving reasonable, and satisfactory answers to them, I may leave every wilful neglect without excuse. And some object,

1. Against the Posture we receive it in, which is Kneeling: against which they plead,

1. That it is not agreeable to that Posture, which the Disci­ples received it in.

To which we answer,

That no Pretenders to Christianity in these Parts of the World do receive it in that Posture, that the Disciples did; which was not sitting, but rather lying. The same men plead, that they received it in a Table gesture, which to them was such; but to us is sitting: therefore, say they, we agree with 'em in a Table gesture, though not in the same Posture of Body: which is nearer to 'em, than the Church of Eng­land goes.

We argue,

1. That no reason can be given, why a Table gesture, which is different according to different places; should be ob­liging, and not the very Posture, it was then given in. There is no Precept, nor Example for choosing the one, rather than the other. Therefore this is merely Election, and not done upon any sufficient warrant.

2. Here were many Circumstances considerable, as the gesture, lying; the Persons, to whom, which were Men only; the number, but twelve; the time, at Night, and that after Supper. Now if we must observe one Circumstance, why not the rest? It is perfectly humoursom to make one ob­liging, and not another; when the Scripture leaves all alike.

2. It is pleaded, that Kneeling seems an Adoration, either of the Table, we kneel before, or of the Bread, and Wine.

1. Adoration of the Table was a thing never used in the Christian Church. There are some indeed, that have bowed toward the East, and therefore toward the Table, because it stands in the East end of the Church; but the reason of this [Page 24] was, not because the Table stood there, but because they ex­pected our Saviour should, at the last day; appear first in that part of Heaven: from that saying, Mat. 24. 27. As the lightning comes out of the East, and shines even to the West: so shall the coming of the Son of man be. For the same reason they turn'd toward the East at the rehearsal of the Creed; and from thence we bury our Dead with their Faces that way.

2. Others have bowed this way, because as the Jewish Temple had it's Holy of Holies; so they reckon a Divine Presence in this, above what there is in other parts of the Church. For though every part hath the same Consecra­tion, and the whole is the House of God; yet this, say they, is as the highest Room, and the Presence Chamber; here the Christian Sacrifice is offered; here the King comes down to see his Guests; and is graciously present with every Communicant above what he is in other places; in regard of the intimate, and extraordinary Communications of him­self. Those, that have made it motivum cultûs, have ever denyed, that they make it terminativum. All Christian Pro­fessors would ever have look'd upon it to be as vile, and unjust an imputation, as those did, who were accused to worship an Asses Head; or to kill a Child, and eat his Flesh, and drink his Blood.

We are all Commanded to a Publick Worship, and are here determin'd to such, and such parts of the Church: and Kneel­ing is the very Posture of Prayer, which therefore all, with­out lawful impediment, ought to use: whence it may as well be said, that they worship the part of the Seat they Kneel be­fore, as that they Worship the Table, who Kneel about it at the Sacrament.

This is such a surprizing Objection, that the Church, which hath been careful to remove every scruple, never speaks to; as not dreaming any would be so vain in their Imaginations, as to make such an Objection. And indeed I must look upon it, not so much a real scruple, as a malicious slander of the Order of our Church.

[Page 25] 2. Some think Kneeling an adoration of the Sacrament of Bread or Wine.

Indeed the worshipping the Bread is practised in the Church of Rome; therefore our Church expecting some scruple this way, doth declare at the end of the Communion, ‘That Kneeling is injoyn'd, for a signification of our humble, and grateful acknowledgments of the Benefits of Christ, therein given to all worthy Receivers—; no adoration is intended, or ought to be done; either to the Sacramental Bread, and Wine, there bodily received; or to any corporal presence of Christ's Natural Flesh, and Blood. For the Sacramental Bread, and Wine, remain still in their Natural Substances, and therefore may not be adored; (for that were Idolatry, to be abhor'd of all faithful Christians) and the Natural Body, and Blood of our Saviour Christ are in Heaven, and not here; it being against the truth of Christ's Natural Body to be at one time in more places, than one.’

This is so plain, and rational, that where it cannot please, certainly nothing can. I am confident, few that make this Objection, know of this Declaration; I have that Charity as to believe, did Men well study what the Church injoyns, and her Reasons, and Motives why, they would be asham'd of their own scruples.

2. Obj. Some are against the Administration of it by a set Form of Prayer: for Christ Blessed the Bread, &c. but the form of Blessing is not set down; Ergo he never intended it should be given by set forms; but that all should be left to their own conceptions, in imitation of him.

We answer;

That had he repeated the Sacrament, he might, perhaps, have used the same form again. For he, that gave a form to his Disciples, and that twice; and did himself Pray the same words three times in the same day, Mat. 26. 39. 42, 44. can­not in reason be supposed to be against a form in the Sacrament. If what Christ hath not done in this case be so obliging, what [Page 26] he hath done in the like case must be much more obliging: because there is a fairer Expression of his Will in this, than can be supposed in that: therefore if, because Christ hath not given us a form for the Sacrament, the Church may not appoint one; it must needs be, that since he hath given us a General Form, and indeed a Common Prayer, suited to all Times, Persons, and Places, that therefore we may use no other. Therefore while they argue against a Form, they do but put us in a way to establish that most perfect Form, Christ hath taught us, to the exclusion of all other. Some private Teachers have, at this very Sacrament, as well as at Baptism; used the same Prayer, without any material Alterations; of which some in­stances may be given; now this, though of their own making, is as much a Form, as that appointed by the Church: yet these Men never judge this unlawful; why then should they judge the other so? Unless because injoyned, which brings the di­spute to another Question, viz. from Forms to the injunction of'em. Even Presbyterian Writers, as Calvin, Jenkins, &c. tell us, that where there is the Word taught, or (as some) sound Doctrine, and Administration of the Sacraments; there is a true Church: Ergo, according to them, the manner of Blessing is not material to the being of a Church. The truth is, Christ hath given us the Substance, but hath left the Cir­cumstances to the Church, as when, how, &c. and for several Reasons the Church thought fit to appoint very early Forms; and Luther tells us, that they of the Reformation still re­tain'd the Publick Prayers; and Administration of the Lord's Supper. He speaks this by way of Purgation, and saith that their Church is falsly accused, in that it is said, she hath abo­lished the Missa. This is one difference he makes between them­selves, and that Spirit of Phanaticism, which he elsewhere saith is crept into the World; that delights in corners, &c. And such was the sense of the Augustane Confession presented to the Emperor Charles the Fifth, by the Duke of Saxony in the Name of the Protestant Princes, &c. of Germany. Therefore [Page 27] these Men do reproach, and condemn not only the first Re­formers from Popery beyond the Seas; whom they pretend to admire, and call the Lights of the World: But our Refor­mers, and that Reformation too; which even themselves are apt to speak the greatest Mercy, that God hath done to his Church in these Nations. And indeed such scruples serve only to evidence to what Unreasonable excesses a wild, and roving spirit is apt to run Men; and how destructive a lawless Li­berty is to all Religion, and Government in the World. And if any Form for the Communion be allowed, there can be no Objection against that appointed by our Church; for however some Parts of our Liturgy be cavill'd at, this hath escap'd as free as any. For those Men, who put in their Objections against the Common Prayer to the Convocation called by His Maje­sty, An. Dom. 1662. had nothing material in this Service to fix upon: but that they may say something, they plead a little impropriety of speech in the Prayer after Receiving, viz. may be fulfill'd with thy Heavenly Grace. Which is but a composi­tion signifying satisfactory measures of Divine Blessings; a be­ing filled full with thy Heavenly grace. While Mr. Baxter himself hath acknowledged, that he hath sometimes heard such Extempore Prayers from his Non-Conforming Brethren, that no wise man could say, Amen to 'em.

3. Object. Is mixt Communions.

To which we plead; that our Saviour, who knew the hearts of all men, gave the Sacrament to Judas, even after he had Covenanted to betray him. For, Luke 22. 14. he sat down with the Twelve, of which number Judas was one: V. 19. 20. he institutes, and gives this Sacrament; which done, he faith V. 21. The hand of him, that betrays me, is with me on the Table: Therefore Judas was present, when it was given; and conse­quently did receive with the rest, unless excluded, or suspended by our Lord; which cannot be supposed; because,

1. There is no mention of any such thing, and we ought not to presume beyond what the Text may seem to bear. And,

[Page 28] 2. When our Saviour said, that one of them should betray him; V. 21. they are surpriz'd, and inquire, Master is it I? But such an Exclusion, and such a Declaration immediately upon it, would have given 'em a just suspition, who it was.

The Condition of the Church in this World is mixt, and therefore is compared to a field of wheat full of tares: which Argument Calvin speaks largely to in his Institutions against the Anabaptists, and Novatians. It is contray to that Right, which Baptism gives to every Person, till suspended by the Minister, or excluded by the Church. Therefore though the impure Corinthian was meritoriously Excommunicate upon the commission of the Fact; yet he was not legally shut out, till it was made the Act of the Church: till which time, he had a Right still to come. For which reason St. Paul was so pressing to that Church, to purge out that leaven. And in the interim we do not find any Precept, or Example, of a Separation from the Communion of that Church, because that Person was not yet shut out. Nor from the Church of Galatia, where there was such a defection to Mosaick Rites, that St. Paul saith, I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labor in vain. None from Laodicaea, or Thyatira. And therefore what Texts soever they found this Opinion on are abused: for we must not ex­pound any place contrary to the Practice of Christ, his Apo­stles, and the Churches of God.

These Men make themselves more pure, than Christ him­self; and greater Precisians than the very Apostles. It is a most Pharisaical Doctrine, that saith to others, like the Hypo­crite in the Prophet, stand off, for I am Holier than thou. The wickedness of this conceit will appear from hence, viz.

1. That it adds to the Commands of God; for which cause Calvin saith, that these Men are rigidiores multò quàm Paulus, much more severe, than Paul himself, who bids every one to examine himself, but not others.

2. It puts men upon Uncharitable censures, and judging of other men; contrary to the Command of Christ, Judge not [Page 29] that ye be not judged; and contrary to the Apostle, Rom. 14. 4. and James 4. 12. Who art thou, that judgest another?

3. It supposes another man's Sin, which I have no way in­couraged, or been, in any point, a partaker of; may pollute the Ordinance to me, though duely prepared my self; con­trary to the Apostles Doctrine, Tit. 1. 15. to the pure every thing is pure.

4. This Doctrine doth unavoidably destroy the Churches Unity, Order, and Peace; for we can never joyn with any Church in the World, but we shall find mixt Communions: and therefore must be always shifting, forming, and gathering of new Churches. And that cannot be a Duty, which puts men upon the breach of those Undeniable, and indispensable ones, viz. Charity, Ʋnity, Order, and Peace.

This is a fit Opinion to make men Seekers; but such as shall never find. Therefore Calvin saith, Inst. l. 4. cap. 1. that men do in vain seek a Church nullo naevo inspersam, that hath no ble­mish, and mixture in it. And if any pollute this Ordinance, I should think it is these very men, who are so uncharitable, proud, and censorious, which are the Sins of the Devils; and stand as directly opposite to the Nature, and designs of the Gospel, as the grossest lusts of the Flesh.

Calvin saith, Institut. l. 4. cap. 1. he hath no excuse, qui ex­ternam Ecclesiae communionem deserit: ubi Dei verbum praedi­catur, & Sacramenta administrantur, who forsakes the external Communion of that Church, where the Word is Preached, and the Sacraments administred. Elsewhere he saith, such are Phrenetici Spiritus, mad hot-headed People. And tanti Ec­clesiae suae Communionem facit Dominus, &c. the Lord so highly esteems the Communion of his Church, that he reckons those Renegado's, and Desertors of their Religion, whoever shall alienate themselves from any Christian Society, which hath the Ministry of the Word, and Sacraments. And Poterit vel is Doctrinae, vel in Sacramentorum administratione—Vitii quidpiam obrepere, quod alienare nos ab ejus Communione non debeat. Every [Page 30] Error in the administration of the Word, and Sacraments, is not a sufficient cause of Separation. Luther on the Epistle to the Gala­tians, saith they are Apostles of Men, but never sent by God, who creep into corners, and do not enter into the Publick Church. According to whom, separation upon any of these Pleas is an evidence of a wild, and Fanatick Spirit. Mr. Calamy himself at last saw the endless Confusions, which Pharisaical Spirits, that think no Church pure enough for 'em, began to lead men to; and therefore about the middle of the Epistle to the Godly man's Ark, endeavours to check this growing Mischief; ‘Take heed of separating from the Publick Assemblies of the Saints. I have found by Experience, that all our Church Calamities have sprung from this root; He, that separates from the Publick Worship, is like a man tumbling down an hill, and never leaving, till he comes to the bottom of it. I could re­late many sad Stories of Persons professing Godliness; who out of dislike to Church-Meetings, began at first to separate from 'em: and after many changes, and alterations, are turned some of 'em Anabaptists, some Quakers, some Ranters, some direct Atheists. But I forbear, you must hold Communion with all those Churches, with which Christ holds Communion: you must separate from the Sins of Christians, but not from the Ordinances of Christ. Take heed of un­churching the Churches of Christ, lest you prove Schisma­ticks, instead of being true Christians.’

When men once have an itch after Novelties, under the no­tion of Reformation; every one is finding fault with what others do, till at last they can find no Church, or Communion pure enough for 'em; because not suited in all Points to their own humors. Therefore Mr. Calamy in the next Page doth wish us to avoid, as Soul-Poyson, all Doctrines, which

1. Tend to Liberty,—

2. Which hold forth a superstitious strictness, above what is required in the Word.

3. Which are Antimagistratical, and Antiministerial.

[Page 31] But such is this Doctrine of refusing the Sacrament on pre­tence of mixt Communions; and therefore, according to Mr. Ca­lamy, ought to be avoided as Soul-Poyson. We need no other Arguments against a Separation from our Church, than the Writings, and Practices of the first Reformers from Popery both beyond the Seas; and in this Nation. The Puritans against the Congregational way; and (which differs in terms only) the late Presbyterians against the Independents.

4. Object. is against Compulsion, especially from the Civil Magistrate.

This is no more than Hezekiah did in the case of the Passo­ver, which answered to this Sacrament. For 2 Chron. 30. 5. Proclamation was made from Bersheba to Dan; that they should come, and keep the Passover: which was occasion'd by the neglect of it, as now amongst us: and this stands recorded to the praise of this Pious King. Now the Gospel doth not lessen the Power, or the care of Kings over their Subjects. Christ, and his Apostles, never tampered with the Civil Government. Religion then never strip'd the Crown of Prerogatives under Pretence of the Peoples Privileges. Therefore Kings may Com­mand as much now, as then. Whence Mr. Baxter himself doth grant, that the King may Command the Subject to his Duty. Else certainly he may Command nothing at all. And in his Apol. That the Kings Laws bind the Conscience, to a Conscionable Per­formance of all his lawful Commands: And therefore to this Duty of the Sacrament in particular, this being a lawful Command, because commanded by Christ himself. But let it be on all sides supposed a Duty, yet still we have two Objections re­maining; as,

1. They are not prepared.

We Answer,

There may be a Proximate, and accidental unmeetness even in good Men; for some emergent occasions, some suddain surprize, &c. may discompose, and disorder the Soul: at which time we do not censure a forbearance: But an habitual [Page 32] unmeetness is inexcusable. God, and the King, exact this Duty of you, and if from one Sacrament, and Year to another; you still cry, you are unprepared; the Sin is your own. Your neglects cannot null a Duty, and take off the Obligation of a Law. Should they wait, till you say, you are ready, that day, I believe, would never come.

Doest thou really think, thou art unprepared, and yet makest no Conscience of preparing thy self? This implies the giving up of thy self, as lost for ever. For if thou art unmeet for this Or­dinance, thou art unmeet for the Fellowship of the Saints: if unmeet to eat, and drink in his Presence, besure thou art un­meet for the Beatifick Vision. For he, that is not qualified for a remoter, cannot be qualified for a more intimate Communion.

This brings thee into a necessity of Sin; for he, that is idely unprepared; sins if he eats; and sins, if he lets it alone; for the one is an abuse, the other a contempt of this Ordinance.

Canst thou plead, thou art unprepared to send thy Chil­dren, and Servants, to be Catechised? yet observe it, the same Men, that neglect the one, do neglect the other. Which gives me to presume, that this is but a Pretence, not a real Cause: and that thou think'st thy self not so much unmeet for the Ordinance, as the Ordinance unmeet for thy self. Let men comply with their Duty in all things, but this; and then I shall have some Charity for such a Plea.

2. Object. If it be never so much a Duty in it self, yet it is not so to them; because their Consciences are not satisfied, and whatever is not of Faith is Sin.

Answ. If it be thy Conscience, it is such an one, as brings thee into a Necessity of Sin. For if thou eatest, thou sinnest against thy self: if thou eatest not, thou sinnest against God, and the King. Now God never brings any man into a Neces­sity of Sin: therefore this is not a Conscience according to Godliness, as some speak, but an Erroneous one. Therefore such men ought to use all the means of Information, that they may come without prejudice to this Duty. And in the mean [Page 33] time must be content to suffer. For they must not think, their Dissatisfactions may supersede the Laws. For if so, all Laws would be made useless; and no man would suffer for any thing, which they please to plead Conscience for.

It is but few years, since the Parliament, by way of Iest im­posed the Sacrament, &c. upon all Persons in Places of Trust, or Profit; which Act is still in force, and was promoted espe­cially by the late Lord Shaf—and Presbyterian Party; under Pretence of discovering, and removing Papists. But not a man then cried out of Compulsion, and Impositions on the Consci­ences of Men; nor were any excused from these Pleas, that they are not prepared; or that it is against their Consciences. Whence they lay that upon others, which they reckon a grie­vance themselves. And would not be done by, as themselves do to others. Down from late Representatives, to Magistrates, and Common Councils, even to the Petty Offices, and Places of the Kingdom, I have scarce yet met with a man, but what, for the gaining his Point, could allow of an Occasional Communion; but when there is nothing but plain Duty in the case, we have noise about Compulsion, and Tender Consciences; are clog'd with Cases, and Scruples; and hear nothing but touch not, tast not, handle not. Which renders the sincerity of this Plea much suspe­fuspected. And because some will never be wrought upon, we come,

2. To what is required of the Church-wardens: and that is, to Present such as obstinately refuse. They are sworn to do the Duties of Church-wardens; which Duties are contain'd in the Book of Articles to that purpose; where the Presenting such is expresly required. No man will presume that the Fathers of our Church will exact that of you, which is not your undoubted Duties: and was it put upon issue, whether this be so or not; no man will doubt, which way the tryal would go.

Church wardens are the Guardians of the Church; whose Obligations reach not only to the Ʋtensils of it; but to Loite­rers, and Disturbers of the Congregation; to all Contemners, [Page 34] and Depravers of the Liturgie: to all obstinate Neglecters of Publick Prayers, Catechising, and Sacraments, &c. Whence they are call'd the Bishops Eyes; by whom he sees the State, and Condition of every Parish within his Jurisdiction, all which they are Sworn to do; they have given their Faith; and the Oath of God is upon 'em: and how they may satisfie their Consciences without performing the Matter of that Oath, needs a good Casuist to tell us. In this case Pity, and Charity to others, is the greatest Cruelty, and Injustice to your selves. Such Favors are downright Perjuries. And there is no man, that desires you to commit this Sin for his sake, that would willingly bear the Punishment of it in your stead.

3. It is requir'd of us, that, in case of failure; we should Present the Church-wardens and such as obstinately refuse at once. The Law saith, they shall, but we may Present: we have the Power, but they the Necessity. Yet how far the Duty of obeying every Ordinance of Man; and the Oath of Ca­nonical Obedience, may oblige us in this particular: and how far the word [obstinate] is to be taken, seems worthy our Con­siderations. And because that term [obstinate] seems a limi­tation restraining this Duty of Presenting to some Neglecters only; that we shall present, not all, but such; I purpose in a day, or two; to present every Family in both Parishes with a Copy of these Discourses; that they may peruse, and weigh 'em at leisure: whereupon I hope that all under Obligation will either receive this Easter, or give me the reasons of their de­layes; that we may be able to judge whether they be Obstinate, or not; and be capable of shewing our selves both Sober, and Honest.

The Punishment then of obstinate refusals is Excommunica­tion, which some men do incourage themselves to the hazard, and contempt of, by pleading,

1. That it was not used anciently, as now, upon light Causes, as differences in the mere Circumstantials of Re­ligion:

[Page 35] We answer: Differences may be little in themselves, but if they lead to Separation, they are not to be accounted little; because they then destroy Ʋnity, Charity, and Peace. There­fore it was decreed of old, that if any keep Separate Meetings, the Presbyter shall be deposed; and the People Excommunicate: and there be instances of several, that have suffered accordingly. The Infancy, and Persecutions of the Church, not only hin­dered her Order, and good Government; but kept many things practised in those times from our knowledge. If there is uncertainty as to the Succession of Bishops, and that in the most famous Churches then in the World, as Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria; we must not expect an account of all the Uses, and Reasons of Excommunication in those times. What notices we have are sufficient, though there was much more done, than recorded. Nor is this Punishment beyond the Merits of the Cause; For Schism is directly contrary to the Nature, and designs of the Gospel, which is to Unite us in one Body, to bring us into one Sheepfold, &c. And hath a more direct, and immediate tendency, to the Confusion, and Ruine of Church, and State, than Lusts of the Flesh have.

2. They plead, that as Excommunication is called a deliver­ing to Satan, so such Persons were tormented in Body, or Mind, or both; but now we see no such things, whence, say they, it is not regular, or not done upon due, and sufficient Causes among us.

We answer, That Miracles were wrought for the more powerful Conviction of the Gentiles; and the more the Gospel obtain'd, the less frequent they grew; till they ceased in the Third Century, unless in some rare instances: So those sensible Evidences of Divine displeasure upon Excommunicate Persons were extraordinary, and design'd only to make Excommuni­cation terrible to all Ages of the Christian World, and therefore after some instances ceased too. Now men may as well argue against the Gospel it self, because not backed by Miracles still; as against the Validity of Excommunication, because not fol­lowed [Page 36] now by such dreadful Visitations, as before. Korah, &c. for Schism, and Rebellion, went down alive into the Pit; they, that offered strange fire were consum'd by fire from Heaven: those, that tempted God in the Wilderness were destroyed of the destroyer, &c. which things were writ for our Admoni­tion, 1 Cor. 10. that we might learn to avoid those Sins, against which God had so declared his wrath from Heaven. But after-Ages finding no such Judgments on such Offenders, may as well conclude these Sins differ in Causes, and Circumstances, and are not the same in Guilt, though in Fact; as that Excom­munication is not valid, and regular, because Persons are not buffeted by Satan, as soon as cast out of the Church.

2. They plead, That in after-ages, Excommunication had powerful Effects on the Minds and Consciences of Men: in ei­ther bringing 'em by Repentance into the arms of the Church, or by leaving 'em under a reprobate sense; but now no such things. Ergo—To which for brevity only thus;

1. Those times were many Ages nearer the Apostles, whence those instances of Wrath upon Excommunicate Persons were more fresh, and warm amongst 'em, and therefore made more deep impressions upon the Minds of Men, than now.

2. The causes of Excommunication then were Three, viz.

1. Practical Immoralities.

2. Falling to Gentilism; in Sacrificing to Idols, and deliver­ing up their Bible in time of Persecution; for which they were called Traditores, and were hardly received into the Church.

3. The falling away to Schismatical, and Heretical Con­gregations; as appears from Apostolical Canons, Councils, and the Practice of the Church.

Now the two first sorts, being Excommunicate, had no Church to fly to; nothing under which they could shelter, and main­tain their hopes of Heaven. And therefore they were easily convinced, and perswaded to return. But now generally Men do first leave the Church, before the Church doth cast 'em out: they become usually Members of Separate Congregations, [Page 37] where they promise themselves a more certain way to Heaven; than amongst us; and therefore neither matter Excommuni­cation, before it comes; nor are capable of seeing their Dan­gers, when under it. The case is like that of the Publicans, and Harlots on the one hand, and the Pharisees on the other: not that I Parallel the Persons so much as the Case; the former had no Religion to palliate their Sins, and create an hope; and therefore were easily convinced, and brought to a Saviour: but the other trusting to their own Religion would never be wrought upon.

Then the third sort, that were Excommunicate for Separa­tion; they stood upon like terms with them amongst us; each were then, and are now, Members of a Congregation, where they expect Salvation: but here lies a difference, in those an­cient times all men, that were not of their own Party did avoid 'em; and would hold no Society, and Commerce with 'em, which tended mightily to shame, convince, and reduce 'em. But now even they, that are of the Church, make hardly any difference between Excommunicate Persons, and others; as if the thing were not worthy their Considerations, unless, per­haps, as a Civil, and Politick instrument of Government; while all others look upon 'em as Confessors, comfort, and incourage 'em; which naturally tends to the blinding, hardning, and rendering 'em mightily uncapable of seeing the Evil, and Dan­gers; they are under.

Now as to the latter part of the Objection, viz.

2. Those, that lay under Excommunication then, were usually given up to a Reprobate sense; but now they continue as sober, honest, and well-disposed after, as before it: whence they con­clude against the Validity of it as used amongst us, that it binds not in Heaven.

We answer, That by giving up to a Reprobate sense, and hardning the heart, we understand two things,

1. God's withdrawing his Grace: And,

2. Mens betaking themselves thereupon to those several Evils, they are disposed to.

[Page 38] Some to Debaucheries, and Atheism: others to unlawful Schisms, and Disturbances; in which many become more blind, hardned, and incorrigible; more satisfactorily, and im­moveably fixed in Delusions, after Excommunication, than before. Which must be imputed to God's departure from them, who depart from his Church, slight her Admonitions, and contemn her Censures. We may find too many instances to prove this, that a man may be under a Reprobate sense, and yet seem Religious to himself, and others; as many Here­ticks did. Therefore these Objections can take off nothing from the Weight, and Power of Excommunication; but leaves it terrible to every Man, that hath any regard to his Eternal Safety.

We have now one Argument in the Text, to press us to this Submission to every, and therefore to this Ordinance of Man; viz. for the Lord's sake: that is,

1. Because the Lord Commands it: therefore out of Con­science of our Duty to him, we should do it. And,

2. God is the Author, and Defender of all Order, and Go­vernment, Rom. 13. 1. The Powers, that are, be ordain'd of God: and V. 4. He is the Minister of God, therefore we should Submit to him, for his Sake, who hath set him over us. Fear God, Honor the King, are inseparable Duties; he can be no good Christian, who is no good Subject, and no good Churchman.