fuppofed than owned, and that is this; Suppofe that the Terms of the Communion of the Church are not only inexpedient, but really finful; if fo, then I fhall readily grant, that the Church ought not to be communicated with, while the Terms of her Communion are fuch. But in this part of the Argument I fhall prefume to fay with fome confidence, and I hope without offence, that however the Teachers of the feparated Congregations may fometimes flily infinuate fome fuch Jealoufies into the Heads of their unwary Hearers; yet it is not eafie to find a confiderable man amongthem, who will not be ashamed to own it publickly, or who doth himself really believe it.

A

Now though this Affertion may feem to carry fomething of uncharitableness in it; because that the Separation from the Church is fo avowed and preffed upon the People, as if that it were highly neceffary, and that Communion with the Church was highly criminal, at least in the Opini on of the Teachers. It being a plain

cafe

cafe that the People are wheedled into Separation, upon the account that they suppose their Teachers know it to be unlawful: Now as to this, I muft needs fay, it is fhrewdly to be fufpected, that there is in this cafe a very great Cheat impofed by the Preachers and the People upon one another, and by both upon the whole Nation ; becaufe that it is as often evident as there is occafion for making it fo, that among the Pastors and the Flock there are not many, who in a time of Tryal approve themselves to be in good earnest; I have been credibly informed (not to say that I am able to make it good) that Mr. Calamy did before His Majefty, and divers Lords of the Council profefs, that there was not any thing in the Constitutions of the Church to which he could not conform, were it not for the fcandalizing of others; fo that in his Efteem the Conftitutions of the Church were in themselves Innocent, and the whole Objection against them lay in the mistakes of other men. Mr. Tombs the Leader of the Anabaptifts,

hath

hath writ a Book to fhew the lawfulnefs of reforting to the Publick Congregations. The Author which I before mentioned affures us in behalf of the Presbyterians, that they not only maintain the Doctrine of the Church of England, but likewife communicate in her Publick Worship, in his fecond Difcourfe of the Religion of England, page 17. By which acknowledgment we may take an estimate of the Honefty of their Separation.

Nay, I fhall venture to fay thus much farther, that the lawfulness of joyning in the Publick Worship is underftood by the Layety as well as Clergy amongst them, is evident from these three Things: Firft, that there are those Perfons to be named, who came to Church before the Act of Oblivion, who never did fince: Secondly, that immediately after the Act of Uniformity, whilft the Hopes of Toleration were very uncertain, there was a much greater Conformity both in the City of London, and over the whole Nation than ever hath been fince: Thirdly, that I have en

quired and could never learn that there was fo much as one example to be given of any one of all the Patrons or Profelytes of the Conventicles who did leave the fmalleft Office whatever, rather than he would, in obedience to a late Act of Parliament, joyn in the Prayers and receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the Order of the Church of England: From which it doth appear plainly, that in these mens efteem, either there is no fin in communicating with the Church of England, or else, that these Gentlemen of fo extreamly tender Confciences, can deliberately commit a fin, and that when they are performing the most folemn Act of Adoration of Almigh ty God, and with all the fhews of Devotion imaginable: And seeing that these things are fo, is it not huge pitty that a fetled Church, and a Church in great Reputation over all the Reformed Parts of Christendom, should be run down by a meer noife of Conscience, when it is very plain that when ever there is a real Cafe put,

where

where Confcience ought to fhew it felf, that then no fuch thing appears, neither is there the leaft evidence that it is fo much as thought upon.

gy,

If there be any Objection against the prefent Conftitution; it must be either against the Articles, the Liturthe Canons or the Ceremonies; As to the Articles, there is fcarce fo much as one Objection pretended against them, farther than as they relate to the following Heads; and if there were, fuch an Objection could not cafily be alleadged by the People as a juft excufe for their Non-conformity, because they are not at all concerned for to fubfcribe them, unless they bring upon themselves a voluntary Obligation by fome Act of their own, as taking a Degree in the Univerfity: But in this Point many words are needless; for befides the Testimony of all Churches abroad, we have at home two Witneffes beyond all exception to the Innocency and Honour of the Articles, even the two late celebrated Advocates, the one for Comprehenfion, the other for To

leration;