of God is truly Preach'd, and the Sacraments rightly Adminiftred, who upon search may be found to be not only the Celebrated Authors of the Proteftant Reformation, but the moft Learned Divines of the Reformed Churches ever fince.

3. It will from hence follow, that it is abfurd, and almost contradictious for those who embrace our Doctrine, to charge us with Idolatrous and Superstitious Rites, fince 'tis fo unlikely,that I cannot tell whether I may affirm it an utter impoffibility,that that Church fhould enjoyn in its Conftitution Superftition or Idolatry, which has no one Doctrine or Opinion favouring of either, but exprefly many, nay, all neceffary to impuga and overthrow both; for befides that, 'tis not likely that any Church fhould impose Rites repugnant to its own Docrine and Principles: So that if any fuch were to be found amongst us, it were to be charg❜d on the Perfonal Corruptions of Men, not the Frame and Conftitution of our Church: Befides this, I say, 'twill puzzle a very subtile Schoolman to form a Notion of Superftition and Idolatry in Practice without a Superftitious or Idolatrous Opinion to Found it upon.

And

And thus, I think, I have fufficiently made it out, that the Doctrine of the Church of England is fuch, both as to Matters of Faith and Practice, as can give no just cause of Offence to any, unless Socinians, Quakers, Anabaptifts, and such kind of Sects, which are not only Condemn'd by all the Reformed Churches as well as ours, but also judged a Scandal and Reproach to the Reformation it felf: You have heard too partly, of what Confequence the right understanding of this Point, is but this will appear more clearly, whilst I fhew you.

2. That there is nothing in our Ecclefiaftical Government which can be a just ground of Separation and Non-Conformity.

I will not here go about to prove that our present Form of Government can lay the best claim to Apoftolical Inftitution of any of thofe that are this day any where to be found in Christendom; for though I do believe this in my Conscience my felf, yet I'll freely confefs (though this be more, it may be, than some of better Abilities will Con me thanks for) that this Controversie has fo much of Obscurity and Perplexity in it, that it is not eafie to Convince such

of

of this, who are under any confiderable prejudices against it: I'll therefore proceed another way, and will ask our Brethren, Do they believe, that as in Scripture Fundamentals of Faith are plain and evident, but less neceflary Opinions are not? So in the Matter of Church-Government, the Effentials of it are exprefly and clearly deliver'd and prefcrib'd, but not all the Circumftantials of it? If they believe fo, then they have not the leaft Reason to defert our Church upon the Account of its Polity; for there is nothing Effential to Ecclefiaftical Government that is really wanting in ours: Has any form a true Ordination or Dedication of Men to the Service of God in his Church? We have much more; have they those who for the Edification of the Churches of Chrift, Preach the Gospel, Administer the Sacraments? We as much, if not more: Have they any Method to preserve the Unity of the Churches of Chrift, and to Propagate the Faith of Chrift? (I doubt they have not, as might be easily made out from their own Records, and the Hiftories either of Presbytery or Independency; but if they have) I am fure we have much more: One thing I must confess

We

we have not, I cannot fay we want it, i. e. Lay-Elders, a device as new as Popular ;but I pray, of what use are these? They can neither Preach nor Administer the Sacraments, nor is there fure any Paftoral Power of Difcipline Originally in them; and as for private Inftruction and Admonition, I am very Ignorant St. Paul does not in feveral places make that a part of the Paftoral Office of the Minister, fure he forgot that there was such a Constitution as that of Lay. Elders, in the Church of Chrift; or which I rather believe he did not think any fo fit for the discharge of this, as the Minister, being a Duty of the greatest Importance, and the greatest Difficulty: Have they a Discipline to restrain or cut off Offences? So have we: That it has not been exercifed with strictness, is to be imputed in the greatest part to that tenderness which our Church ever had (and I hope will in a proper meafure never want) for those who have Revolted from her, let not her Moderation become her Crime, forgive her this wrong. Thus we have then in our Constitution all that any Man can fancy to be Effentially neceffary for the Government of the Church of Chrift,

and

and if the Effentials only of Government be clearly and exprefly prescrib'd in Scripture, there can be no pretence for Separation founded here.

What then? Do they believe that Chrift and his Apoftles Inftituted one Form of Church-Government exprefly and clearly delivered in Scripture, not only as to Effentials, but all the Circumftantials of it? And that this Form is by the appointment of Chrift of perpetual Obligation, and unalterable, abfolutely neceffary and Effential to the Being of a Christian Church? If they do not believe this, I would fain know why we may not Rationally allow our Governors as much Light and Prudence, and Spiritual Affiftance too in the establishment of the Circumftantials of Ecclefiaftical Polity, as to a few, and those fanciful and discontented Subjects? For fuch a Rise moft Sects amongst us have had. Why 'tis not as fit that the Subjects fhould comply with the Laws of their Governours,as Governours with the Weaknesses and Fancies of their Subjects? But if they do believe there is any fuch Form thus evidently prefcrib'd in all its Circumftantials, and Eflentially neceffary to the Being of a Church, then pray

be