munion of an established church is lawful and sufficient to salvation; there of necessity it must be unlawful to set up any separate church or congregation in opposition to her. allowed, as lawful, thus to

cies

For if once it be divide from such a

church, it will, he thinks, be impossible to find out any rule or principle upon which to put a stop to perpetual divisions after divisions, as men's fanmay incline them farther and farther to depart from each other, until every single man comes to stand separate by himself, and no such thing as a Christian society or congregation remains upon the earth; and yet no man to be blamed for this separation: which how it can consist with the notion of a church or congregation, ixxλnsía, or the illustrations of that notion, which we meet with in Holy Scripture, from a body and its members; a kingdom, a city, a family, and the people that compose it, a sheepfold, with divers others, which all do denote that unity and society which all Christians are obliged to maintain and keep up one with another, he leaves to the serious consideration of those men, whose practices cannot be justified but upon such dividing principles: and therefore it is with him an undoubted conclusion, that to divide from the established church of England, as it now stands, or to set up any other church or congregation in opposition to her, within those precincts where she is so established, is altogether sinful and unlawful. And thus much for the second part of a true churchman's character, which is, that he truly

embraces the communion of the established church. Give me leave, from what has been said, to draw the three following corollaries.

First, whereas, in some things that are confessedly not necessary to salvation, many learned men of several churches have carried their opinions farther than what their church has ever, by any public act, decreed or determined. If we suppose the case to be the same amongst ourselves, as perhaps it may; yet a man that receives and embraces whatever our church has, by any authentic act or decree, established or determined, may be, and is a true churchman (that is to say, a true Christian, and one who truly embraces the communion of the established church) although in such other things, as I have but now mentioned, he should happen to be of a different judgment from the private opinion of never so many of our greatest divines.

Secondly, whereas it is allowed, on all sides, that our rites and ceremonies, and some other things, by our ecclesiastical laws enacted, are in their own nature indifferent, and but of human institution, ordained and appointed for the sake of decency and order, and the avoiding of confusion and irregularity. He that conscientiously conforms to whatever of that nature is established amongst us (as being lawful in itself, and appointed by lawful authority) is yet a true churchman, although he may be of opinion that several of these same [indifferent] things may be altered for the better; and accordingly endeavours, in a peaceable, modest, and Chris

tian way, to get them so altered by the same authority that at first established them. And though in this his opinion he should be mistaken; yet is he nevertheless a true churchman: it being no part of the character of such a man to be free from all manner of error. But except it appears very clearly to him that the thing is really so indifferent, he will neither attempt, nor so much as give his consent that any alteration should be made in it. For though his charity is such, that he will not condemn any church or single person, but where he has clearly and plainly the law of God of his side, yet where he finds any thing to be settled; and but even probable arguments to induce him to think that it may be of divine or apostolick institution; he is sure it is the safest way to let it stand as it is: and whatever alterations he endeavours or consents to, it is always with a design to promote piety, peace and unity among Christians, and neither to raise any unnecessary controversy in the church, nor so much as seemingly to encroach upon the authority of Christ or his apostles. And farther, before he will consent to any alteration, even in such things as are undoubtedly indifferent, he carefully weighs the probable consequences of such an attempt, and considers, First, that if we have not beforehand a reasonable assurance of some good that will follow from it, it ought to be let alone; because possibly it may produce some evil, though every man cannot easily foresce it. Secondly, that the good which is aimed at by promoting such an altera

1

tion in our church (that is to say, an union with the Dissenters) can with no assurance be expected from it, except some reasonable number of those who dissent from us, do beforehand positively and particularly declare, that they will be satisfied, and join in communion with us upon the making of it and thirdly, that as well-meaning Dissenters, through mistake or weakness, do take offence at our innocent and decent ceremonies; so on the other side there may, possibly, amongst ourselves be many of the like complexion, who would be equally offended at the alteration of some of them: and to run the hazard of a disturbance within ourselves; and, it may be, the loss of many of our own members, while we are not sure of gaining as many others over to us as may counterbalance this danger, is what a true churchman will by no means consent to. And therefore, upon the whole he concludes, that all manner of alterations in the church, as well as in the state, ought to be cautiously and thoroughly considered, both in themselves and their consequences, before they are made or attempted.

Thirdly, a man may be a true churchman (according to the definition laid down) although he consents and desires that a toleration may be granted to those that are of a different persuasion from him in matters of religion. For although he, for his part, is abundantly convinced that he cannot be in a surer and safer way to eternal salvation, than in the communion of the established church; yet to compel others (who are not under the like conviction) by

any penalties to be inflicted either on their bodies or goods, to profess or practise what they solemnly declare to be against their conscience, he judges to be neither reasonable nor agreeable to the rules of the Gospel. But then, as he is a faithful subject to the civil state, as well as a sincere member of the established church, he never can willingly yield to such a toleration as may endanger the ruin or downfal of the one or other: and therefore, although no man can be hindered from thinking whatever he pleases; nor ought any one to be 'compelled to profess a religion, or to worship God any way that he is persuaded is unlawful; yet our churchman does not think it reasonable that all men that please,should be allowed to gather congregations, and there to teach and preach whatever doctrine they shall think fit. For this would be not only a toleration, but even an invitation and encouragement to every man that were ingenious, and not sufficiently awed by eonscience, if he could not be employed or preferred to his mind in the church, to set up for himself; and not only to endeavour to gain such a number of disciples as may support and maintain him, but also to strengthen himself and his party, by sowing division and distraction among those from whom he has divided: which, however, at first, it may seem only to threaten the church, yet will soon be found (as dear bought experience assures us) to have a very evil influence upon the state also. Neither does he judge it fit that any toleration should willingly be granted, and much less encouragement given, to