§ 33. We heartily desire that no innovations should be brought into the church, or ceremonies which have no foundation in the laws of the land imposed, to the disturbance of the peace thereof: but that all men would use that liberty that is allowed them in things indifferent, according to the rules of Christian prudence, charity, and moderation.

§ 34. We are so far from believing that his majesty's condescending to these demands will take away not only differences, but the roots and causes of them, that we are confident it will prove the seminary of new differences, both by giving dissatisfaction to those that are well pleased with what is already established; who are much the greater part of his majesty's subjects; and by encouraging unquiet spirits when these things shall be granted, to make further demands. There being no assurance by them given, what will content all Dissenters: than which nothing is more necessary for the settling of a firm peace in the church.

VIII.

A Defence of our Proposals to His Majesty for Agreement in Matters of Religion.1 — Reliquiæ Baxterianæ, by Sylvester, pp. 248-58.

CONCERNING THE PREAMBLE.

1. We are not insensible of the great danger of the church, through the doctrinal errors of many of those with whom we

When the presbyterian divines had received from the bishops the foregoing answer to their proposals, instead of a statement of concessions which they were expecting, "the brethren," says Baxter, "at first desired me to "write an answer to it. But afterwards they considered that this would "but provoke them, and turn a treaty for concord into a sharp disputation, "which would increase the discord; and so what I had written was never seen "by any man: lest it should hinder peace."-Reliquiæ Baxterianæ, pp. 241-2.

are at difference, also, about the points of government and worship now before us. But yet we choose to say of the party, that we are agreed in doctrinals, because they subscribe the same Holy Scriptures, and Articles of Religion, and Books of Homilies as we do. And the contradictions to their own confessions, which too many are guilty of, we thought not just to charge upon the party; because it is but personal guilt. As to the differences (which in charity and for peace, we had rather extenuate than aggravate ;) it is of objective conceptions that we speak, there being a difference in the things, as well as in our apprehensions. And we conceive that the ancient form of church-government, and the soundness of the liturgy, and freedom from corrupting unlawful ceremonies, are matters that are worthy a conscionable regard and no such little inconsiderable things as to be received without sufficient trial, or used against the dissuasions of our consciences. No sin should seem so small as to be wilfully committed; especially to divines. He that will sin for little or nothing, is not to be trusted when he hath great temptations. "Whosoever shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do, and teach them the same, shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven" Matt. v, 19. And whether the imposer or the forbearers do hazard and disturb the church, the nature of the thing declareth. To you it is indifferent before your imposition; and therefore you may, without any regret of your own consciences, forbear the imposition, or persuade the law-makers to forbear it. But to many of those that dissent from you, they are sinful; and therefore cannot be yielded to by them without the wilful violation of their duty to the absolute Sovereign of the world. If, in the church of Rome, the conscience of a subject forbid the use of crucifixes, and images, and chrism, and holy water, &c., is it therefore they, or is it the pastors, that needlessly impose these things that are the disturbers of the church? The princes might have forborne to make a law restraining Daniel three days from prayer; but

Daniel could not forbear praying three days, though the law commanded it: and which of them then was the disturber

of the peace? If you say that we are wilful, and our consciences are peevish and misinformed; charity and modesty requireth you not to overvalue your own, or groundlessly vilify the judgments and consciences of your brethren. We study as hard as you; and are ready to join with you in the solemnest protestations, as before the Lord, that we are earnestly desirous to know the truth; and we suppose we stand on the calmer side the hedge, in point of temptation: for if we err it is to our cost and loss, and have little but reproach and suffering to entice us willingly to mistake. And we are always ready to try by argument which side it is that is mistaken.

2. May not we crave that necessary things may be secured to us, without being interpreted to seem to insinuate accusations against you? As it is not the authors of this Answer personally considered, that we could be imagined to accuse, because we know them not; so there are others, besides the party with whom we are seeking a reconciliation, that may be averse to the practice of those things about which divines are doctrinally agreed in, especially that part of the vulgar who are, practically, of no religion. And it is very displeasing to us to be called out to an accusation of others; as being a course that will tend more to exasperate than reconcile. Fain we would have had leave to petition for our liberty and for the security of religion, without accusing any of being injurious to it. But it is the unhappy advantage of those that are uppermost, that they can cut out at pleasure such work for those that they would use as adversaries, that shall either make them seem their adversaries, or appear to be really the adversaries or betrayers of the truth, and cast them upon inconveniences and odium which way soever they go. But to be plain with you, if you would but agree with us in the practising, and promoting the practice of, those things about which you profess to be agreed in principles, our differences in all other things would quickly be at an end. The great con

troversy between the hypocrite and the true Christian,— whether we should be serious in the practice of the religion which we commonly profess?-hath troubled England more than any other: none being more hated and derided as Puritans, than those that will make religion their business, and make it predominant in their hearts and lives; while others that hate them, take it up in custom, for fashion, or in jest, and use it only in subserviency to the will of man and their worldly ends, and honour it with compliments, and paint the skin while they stab the heart. Reconcile this difference, and most others will be reconciled.

3. Whether this signify any repentance for the voluminous reproaches which many of you have written against those you call Puritans, your amendment will interpret. That you will give us liberty in our family duties alone is a courtesy that you cannot well deny a Papist or Mahometan, because you have there no witnesses of what they do; and yet we shall take ourselves beholden for it, so low are our expectations. But is there no duty that private Christians owe to one another, for the furthering their salvation, but only for their several families? Why may not those that, on the Lord's day, repeat a sermon in their families, admit a neighbour family to be present, which is not able to help themselves? A great part of the families among the poor are composed of such as can neither write nor read, and therefore know not how to spend the Lord's day when they are out of the congregation: and a sermon forgotten will hardly be so well practised as if it were remembered; and the ignorant will hardly remember it if they never hear it but once. At least, methinks, it should be an encouragement to you, when you have studied what to say to the people (rather than matter of offence) to see them so far value it, as to desire to fasten it in their memories. And if several families join also in the singing of psalms of praise to God, and calling on him for a blessing on the minister and themselves, is this a crime: when perhaps most of those families either cannot pray at all, or not with such cheerful advantage, by themselves? If you are against such

mutual helps as these, you are against the benefit of the people's souls: the Lord pity the flocks that have such pastors! If you are not against them, why are you against our desires of encouragement in them? Have the laws of the land secured any of these to us against your canons? If they have, why have so many families formerly been undone, for such exercises as these, and for fasting and praying together for the pardon of their sins? To deal freely with you, we are constrained so well to know with whom we have to do, that our business is to request you of the clergy, not to provoke the law-givers to make any law against this: that it may not become a crime to men, to pray together, and provoke one another to love, and to good works; when it is no crime to talk, and play, and drink, and feast together. And that it may be no crime to repeat a sermon together, unless you resolve that they shall hear none which is worth their repeating and remembering. And whereas you speak of opening a gap to sectaries for private conventicles, and the evil consequences to the state, we only desire you to avoid also the cherishing of ignorance and profaneness, and suppress all sectaries, and spare not, in a way that will not suppress the means of knowledge and godliness. As you will not forbid all praying or preaching, lest we should have sectarian prayers or sermons, so let not all the people of the land be prohibited such assistance to each other's souls, as nature and scripture oblige them to, and all for fear of the meetings of sectaries. We thought the cautions in our petition were sufficient, when we confined it subjectively to those of our flocks, and objectively to their duties of exhorting and provoking one another to love and to good works, and of building up one another in their most holy faith, and, only by religious peaceable means, of furthering each other in the ways of eternal life and for the order, they being not opposite to church assemblies (but subordinate,) nor refusing the guidance and inspection of their pastors (who may be sometime with them and prescribe them their work and way, and direct their actions,) and being responsible for what they do or say (their doors being open)