ALthough our Learned Divines have different Apprehensions about the most convenient time for setling a Firm and Lasting Union a­mongst Protestants, and about what Condescensions are to be made by us in Order thereunto; whether the Dissenters must in the First place be consulted, or whether without knowing their thoughts, we give them Terms, &c. Yet as to the Union it self, there is a general readiness on our Parts, and notwithstanding the Warm Reflections of the Author of Vox Cleri, it must be yielded that there are good Reasons why the Convocation should know, whether any thing less than the subverting the Foundations of our Constitution will satisfie the Dissenters, and what that is?

The Convocation is to Act the Part of a Wise, as well as Compassionate Physitian, to heal if possible, the wounds, which have been made in the Church by the Division; and it is the Dissenting, that is the Sick [Page 2] Party, which must be discoursed with before the Phy­sitian can safely Prescribe.

It's well known what may be done by the Church towards a Union, but whether what we offer will ef­fectually reduce Dissenters, we are not sure.

Tho we abound with choice Medicines, yet want­ing an Ovietan, we can never know whether this or the other is most Proper, till the Nature of the Di­sease be throughly understood; and to that end, the first thing necessary is an enquiry after the Dissenters thoughts, about what it is they Judge a Grievance, and what it is that will relieve them.

But however these things Issue, what doth more nearly touch the Church it self, must in all Debates in both Houses of Convocation have the Preference. We must neither Hurt nor Neglect our own Constitution; nor must the Church in hopes of a Prodigals Return, lay aside those Motherly Compassions she hath for her Obedient Sons. What­ever Bishop of Worce­sters Unreas. Sep. Pref. pag. 89. is offensive to any of them, de­serves the first Consideration: For a Fa­ction in the Church doth more endanger it than Exter­nal Opposition. Seeing then there have been some Un­happy Wranglings amongst our selve, such Odd con­tests, that we have had the Ill-Luck of being Represented as a Church divided into at least two opposite Parties, into [Page 3] a more Moderate, and Violent one, say some, a Melancthonian and Calvinian, as Doctor Heylin; and as others Phrase it, True Sons of the Church, and Grindalizers, 'twill be the chief care of the Con­vocation to Heal this Distemper.

And whereas there have been different Opini­ons about the Sense, in which we must subscribe, for which the Dissenters have oft boldly Upbraided us, to Solve what is matter of Difficulty, it is the proper Work of the Convocation to make the first step.

The thing in Controversie amongst our selves is, Whether our Subscription be expressive of our Assent unto, and Belief of the Truth of every one of the Subscribed Articles, or only an Assurance, that for the sake of Peace we will not contradict, nor oppose them.

The Learned Chilling worth declares his Senti­ments thus: ‘For the Church of England I am perswaded that the constant Doctrine of it is so Pure and Orthodox, that whosoever believes it, and lives according to it, shall be undoubtedly Saved, [which is as much as to say, He believes Salvation may be had in our Church] and that there is no Error in it, Preface to the Author of Charity maintain­ed. §. 40. which may necessitate, or war­rant any Man to Disturb the [Page 4] Peace, or Renounce the Communion of it. [To which He adds] this in my Opinion is all intend­ed by Subscription.’

A Subscription in this sense may be without an Assent to every Article as True, yea with the Be­lief that some are False; if not so false and Erro­neous as to necessitate or warrant a Man to disturb the Peace of the Church, and renounce it's Com­munion. Nor doth the Excel­lent The part of a Letter of the Primates about Heylins History of the Sabbath. Arch-Bishop Usher look on all the 39 Articles to be receiv­ed as Articles of Faith. ‘He that would have every thing which is put into the Articles of Religion (agreed up­on in the Synod for the avoiding diversity of Opinions, and for the maintainance of Peace, and Uniformity in the Church) to be held for an Article of the Faith, should do well to tell us, whether he has as yet admitted the Book of the Ordination of Bishops and the two Volumes of Homilies into his Creed; for sure I am He shall find these received in the Arti­cles of Religion agreed upon in the Synod held at London 1562.’

The Learned Primate doth in this place say enough to Establish that di­stinction Schism Guarded. §. 1. c. 11. of subscribing to the Arti­cles, [Page 5] as Articles of Peace, and not as Articles of Faith, which by his most Learned Successor Arch-Bishop Bramhall, is more fully explained. ‘We do not (saith he) suffer any Man to reject the 39 Arti­cles of the Church of England at his pleasure, yet neither do we look upon them as Essentials of Saving Faith, or Legacies of Christ, and of his Apo­stles: But in a mean, as Pious Opinions fitted for the Preservation of Unity; NEITHER DO WE OBLIGE ANY MAN TO BELIEVE THEM, BUT ONLY NOT TO CONTRADICT THEM.’

If the Injunction of Subscription be only thus, 'twill afford great ease to the minds of many wor­thy Divines of our Church, 'twill remove the Bone of Contention, that hath been amongst our selves, and for ever prevent the Dissenters reproach­ing us for subscribing in a sence we do not believe to be good.

But that this is the sence of the Church, doth not yet appear by any thing she hath declared; and, as there are many Learned Men for this sence, so there are many as Learned of the contrary Opi­nion.

The Learned Doctor Stillingfleet, now Bishop of Worcester, in his Proposals for Union, supposeth [Page 6] the Subscription to be Absolute, and offereth as an Expedient to accommodate the Diffe­rence, a Mitigation as to the manner Preface to the Unreason. of Separ. p. 91. of Subscription, which he supposeth may be done by an Absolute Subscrip­tion to all those Articles, which concern the Doctrine of the true Christian Faith, and the Use of the Sacraments, and a solemn Promise under their Hand, or Subscription of Peaceable Submission, as to the rest, so as not to oppose, or contradict them, either in Preaching, or Writing.

The Mitigation, as to the manner of Subscription, is by making the Subscription in the same sence Arch-Bishop Bramhall doth take our Subscription at this time to be, but this great Person by offering it as an Expedient for the Dissenters relief, must look on our Subscription as Absolute to all the Articles, which must therefore be received as True, and the Title given these Articles declare the same, in saying, that they were Agreed upon for the avoiding of Diversities of Opinions, which cannot be, if notwithstanding the Subscription, Men may consistently therewith con­tinue to be of divers Opinions. Besides, King James the First, in his Declaration set before the Articles, is positive, that ‘ no Man hereafter shall either Print, or Preach, to draw the Article aside any way, but [Page 7] shall submit to it in the plain and full meaning thereof; and shall NOT PUT HIS OWN SENSE, or COMMENT to be the meaning of the Article, but shall take it in the Literal and Grammatical sense.’ And my Lord Chief Justice Coke Reports, that the Judges of the Kings-Bench would not admit of a Subscription with this Addition, [so far as agreeable to the Word of God, and Law of the Land,] because it contradicted the end of the Injunction, which was to prevent Diversities of Opinion.

Moreover, according to the common usage of the word [Subscribe] it signifies Assent and Consent unto; Allowance, and Approbation of what is Subscrib­ed.

Thus in the Ancient Councils, the Fathers expres­sed their Assent, Allowance, or Confirmation, by sub­scribing their Names and Affixing the Sign of the Cross. In Charters of Donations of Lands and Grants of Priviledges unto Abbies, or Convents, our Kings, Nobles, and Bishops Subscribed, and with them Subscripsi, Consensi, Favi, Confirmavi, &c. were Terms Aequipollent; and Anciently the Competentes to ex­press their consenting to Baptism and Christian Re­ligion Subscribed their Names and were therefore called Subscripti.

It is a generally received Opinion, that whether the Subscriber doth expresly mention the words As­sent, Consent, Allowance, or Approbation, or not, their meaning is included in the Subscription, which is but a Declaration thereof.

The great end of Subscriptions to Articles of Re­ligion is to secure Truth, as well as Peace amongst Christians, and the Subscription imports Assent unto, and Allowance of the Article as True.

Subscription (saith our great Ca­suist, the Learned Bishop Taylor) Duct. Dubit. lib. 4. c. 4. r. 23. §. 1. 2. 4. is undoubtedly an Attestation, or signi­fication of Assent, Allowance and Approbation. ‘ Whoever subscribes, He doth actually approve of the Articles over-written, that he does at that time believe them to be such as it is said they are; TRUE, if they only say they are True; Usefull, if they pretend also to Usefulness; Necessary, if it be affirmed that they are Necessary. If the Sub­scriber believes not this, he by Hypocrisie serves the ends of Publick Peace, and his own Prefer­ment.’

If the Words admit of various Senses, some True, some False, the Question made by the Sub­scriber must be, what is the Imposers sense, for to that by subscribing we Assent. If the Intention of the SUPERIOR be to require our Assent to be testi­fied by Subscription; he that subscribes doth Profess his Assent; and whatever he thinks himself, it is [Page 10] the intention of the Imposer, that qualifies the Subscription: He that Subscribes must do it to those purposes, and in that sense, and signifi­cation of things, which the Supream Power in­tends in his Commanding it.

These Reasonings appear to many Wise and Good Men of our Church very convincing, who comparing their subscriptions with the common sense of the Imposers, are startled, and at a loss what to think or say of it, on which occasion some Men, whose Zeal hath by far exceeded their Judgments, have been too intemperate in Reflect­ing on one another; all which Reflections, for the sake of the Churches Peace, we wish may be Eter­nally Buried in Oblivion.

We will therefore only mention what is matter of GRIEF to some judicious and good Men of our Communion, for on this account several when they fixedly consider that their subscription is the attestation of Assent unto every thing they sub­scribe, are greatly afflicted in their thoughts about it.

There are some, who by their Subscription to the 4 Controverted Articles, intend no more than a solemn Promise of Peaceable Submission, not determining one way or other about the Difference there is between [Page 11] a Bishop and a Presbyter. Though they subscribed the Articles, yet they never took the Book of Order­ing Bishops, Priests and Deacons (as Arch-Bishop Usher observes) in their Creed, nor did they think themselves by their Subscription obliged to a strict, Rigorous and constant observation of every Ceremony, &c. There are others no way Inferiour to these for Learning, or Integrity, who, tho they have no scruple about matters of Church Government, or Ceremony, have as many concerning Points of another Nature, to which they subscribe in Chilling­worths and Bramhals sense.

These Persons by Preaching, Printing, or other­wise will never contradict, or oppose the scrupled Articles, but cannot bear the thoughts, that their Subscription signifie their Assent unto them as True. I will only Instance in one or two.

Art. 8. ‘The three Creeds, Nice Creed, Athana­sius's Creed, and that which is commonly called the Apostles Creed, ought throughly to be received and believed.’

These words [THROUGHLY to be received and believed] seem to signifie nothing less than that every Part, Branch, Article and Clause of every one of these three Creeds must be received and believed, so that although the Word Believe is not [Page 12] set before every Article in any one Creed, yet as the Learned Bishop Pearson Observes, ‘This Word [I Believe] is not to be On the Creed. p. 1. imagined to stand only where it is expressed, but to be carried through the whole Body of the Confession, for, tho it be but twice actually Rehearsed [in the Apostles Creed,] yet must we conceive it virtually prefixed to the Head of every Article;—Neither is it to be joyned with every compleat Article only, but where any Article is not a single Verity, but comprehensive, there it is to be looked upon as affixed to every Part, or single Truth contained in that Article,—so that this Credo rightly considered multiplieth it self to no less than a double number of the Articles, and will be found at least twenty four times in the CREED.’

What this Reverend Prelate, to the great satis­faction of our Church, saith of the Apostles Creed, may for the same reason be spoken of the Athana­sian, and until the Church declares otherwise we must take the Minatory Clauses for Parts of the Creed, especially it is in the very Body of the Creed it self, [He therefore that will be saved must think THUS of the Trinity.] For this Clause, as e­very other Part in the Body of the Creed is every [Page 13] way guarded with a Minatory Sentence. The begin­ing of the Creed is thus; [Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholick Faith; which Faith, except every one do keep Whole and Unde­filed, without doubt he shall Perish everlastingly.] Then follows the Doctrine of the Trinity and Incarnation, and in the close of the Creed it is [This is the Ca­tholick Faith, which except a Man believe Faithfully, he cannot be saved.]

Between these two clauses in the Body of the Creed, comes in this, viz. [Whoever will be saved must think THUS of the Trinity.]

Who then can consider how often this Minato­ry Sentence is inserted in the Creed even in the be­ginning, the Body and close of it, and not think it a Part? Especially considering that in the Ru­brick, the Title of Athanasius's Creed is given to the whole Qui conque vult; thereby making these clauses and branches a Part of it, to which we subscribe by our Subscription to this Article; and it cannot be denyed, that these clauses exclude from Salva­tion, not only those? who reject the whole, but all that do reject any one clause that is about the Trinity, whoever thinks not of it as there ex­pressed cannot be saved, and we by Subscription to this Article approve of this Damning clause; which [Page 14] consideration should (methinks) move Vox Clexi to desire ease in this matter; for Pag. 32. He openly declares that he thinks it not necessary to Salvation that every Man should believe, that Article of the Procession of the Holy Ghost, which yet is in this Creed; and by another Article near it, Whoever will be saved must believe the Procession, and every other particular of this Creed concerning the Trinity, whereby I am afraid our severity will light not only on the Greek Church, but on Thousands of our own Communion, who, though they are not Antitrinitarians, for they believe in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost, do not under­stand the controversie about the Procession, nor some other passages in Athanasius his explications.

Whatever is the Latitude of some, the perplexi­ties occasioned by this Article unto others of our Church, who have merited greatly of Her, can­not but move a compassionate Convocation to offer somewhat for their Relief.

As to this Article it is most certain, that amongst the English Gentry, who have had their Education in our Church, and are Men of great Learning, good sense and Sobriety, there are many worthy Persons, who cannot entertain too restrained thoughts of Gods Merciful Nature, but are of Opinion, that such as Live without the Law, shall be Judged without the Law, that every one Fear­ing God, and working Righteousness in what Nation so­ever shall be accepted of God; that the Efficacious Vertue of Christs Death is of larger extent than the knowledge of his Name, and that more are saved by him, than expli­citly believe in him: Besides there are some great Di­vines in the Reformed Churches abroad as well as of our own Communion, whose Charity cannot be comprehended within the narrow Limits of Calvi­nistic Rigor. These think charitably of some Hea­thens, of a Socrates, an Antonine, a Cicero, &c. whose Morals infinitely exceed those of some Censorious and Debauched Christians, whom at their Fune­rals we pronounce Blessed.

But by a strict subscription we must not only curse the Heathen, but all our Gentry, and Forreign as well as our own Divines, who hope well of the Heathen.

There hath been an Intimation of this given by a very worthy Person, Pag. 13, 14. a Minister in the Country in his Letter to a Member of the Convocation, and it is done with much Wariness and Caution, and it's hoped 'twill meet with a fairer entertain­ment than Vox Cleri hath given it, but lest through the Distempers of some Men, it should fail of the desired success, it's thought necessary to send this Humble Supplicant after it.

I know it's a very tender Point, and we liv­ing in a very Querulous Age, the Reason for a more Gentle Handling it, is the stronger. How­ever, seeing our greatest danger in this particu­lar was likely to arise from the Clamours of our Dissenting Brethren, who now are as deep­ly Plunged into Perplexities of this Nature as the most scrupulous subscriber of our own Communi­on, the chief, if not only Reason against our ap­pearing for Relief in this matter, is over.

Our Dissenting Brethren have been very severe upon us, charging us as though our subscriptions had [Page 17] been unconscionably Rash, because they were to Articles, which we could not take into our Creed, and subscribed unto them only as unto Articles of Peace and Concord: To this distinction their most Learned Defender hath given many an an­gry Answer, and very lately in his English Non­conformity thus writes of it: ‘Some Brains will p. 47. be cheated with a meer Noise of Words, as Birds with a Whistle: We deny not but Peace is one of the ends of the Impositions: But the Question is, what are the means, or whe­ther they will take it for Conformity to Pro­mise [I will live Peaceably] or [I Assent I should live in Peace]. Are you not bound in Or­der to Peace to Assent, and Consent to all things in the Books? Say [I Assent that some things are True and Good, and some things False and Bad, which yet for Peace I will use] and Try how it will be taken.’

To whom I Answer. 1. That according to your own Doctrine, if the Church, that con­tinues the Imposition, allows of our Distinction it is good, and though the whole strength of your great Book turn on this Hinge, it imme­diately dwindles into nothing. And seeing the Church hath not been unacquainted with the Opi­nion [Page 18] of Chillingworth, Usher, and Bramhall, and that their Opinion is closed with by many great Divines amongst our Clergy; may we not Pre­sume that the Churches Silence in the matter is an Allowance. I am perswaded that there are many Honest and Worthy Persons, some of your own Friends especially, who scruple the Cere­monies more than any other thing, who take thus much for granted.

If you say they are mistaken, though I won't be positive, I am afraid so too;. and therefore press for some Redress. However, when you pass Censure on them, you must remember that it's not for an Equivocal Subscription, but their mistaking the Churches Sence. But 2. you, and your Party, Dear, Brother, of all Men in the World, since your own Subscription should not complain of ours. Your Case and ours is now the same. Though we have run farther than you by our Subscription, yet you have followed us in the same Path, and have fallen on some of the same Rocks, and have got a great way within the same Labyrinth and need as much the help of the Convocation and Parliament to extricate your selves as any of our Communion do.

I will endeavour to clear thus much by making some Refle­ctions R. B's Sense of the Sub­scribed Articles of Religion. p. 3. on two or three of your Subscribed Articles. ‘ Art. 3. HE WENT DOWN INTO HELL] that is, into Hades, the State of separated Souls: Of which See Arch-Bishop Ushers Answer to the Jesuits.’

This Article you cannot Subscribe without an Exposition, and your Exposition such as makes your sense more doubtful. For though by Hell you understand Hades, by which you mean, the State of separated Souls; yet it is as delivered by Arch-Bishop Usher, who gives such different accounts of the signification of Hades, that we cannot tell but by Hell you may intend Heaven; for Hades as it imports the State of separate Souls is by some in Usher used to signifie Heaven.

In the Ecclesiastical Use of the Word, Hell (saith Usher) Answer to the Jesuits Challenge of Limbus Patrum, p. 316. is extended to express the Greek Hades, and the Latin Inferi, and whatsoever is contained under them, and so signifies the place of all the Dead in common, and not of the Wicked only.— ‘Now as the com­mon condition of the Dead is considerable three [Page 20] manner of ways, either in respect of the Body sepa­rated from the Soul, or of the Soul separated from the Body; or of the WHOLE MAN indefinitely considered in this State of separation: So do we find the word Hades to be applied by the Antient Greek interpreters of the Old Testament to the common state and place of the Body se­vered from the Soul: By the Heathen Greeks, to the common state and place of the Soul se­vered from the Body, and by both of them to the common state of the Dead.’

But you in your Exposition terminating your sense to the state of separate Souls as explicated by p. 360. the Arch-Bishop; we will see what it is that he saith of it; and it is thus, ‘With Forreign Au­thors the word Hades signifies ordinarily the Common Lodge of Souls separated from their Bodies, whether the particular Place assigned unto each of them be con­ceived to be an Habitation of BLISS, or of MISE­RY.—’ To heap up many Testimonies out of p. 364. of Heathen Authors to prove that in their understanding, All Souls went to Hades, & received there either PUNISHMENT, or REWARD, ac­cording to the Life they lived in this World; would be but a needless work.— ‘If any Man desire to inform himself herein, he may [Page 21] repair to Plutarchs Consolatory Discourse writ­ten to Apollonius, where he shall find the Te­stimonies of Pindarus, and many others, alled­ged touching the State of the Godly in HADES.’

Thus the word Hell imports as much as Hades, and Hades is the place of separate Souls; whether in Bliss, or Misery, but whether you mean by Hell the place of Misery, or Bliss, is not clear. It's pro­bable, that as some Papists by Paradise, which is the third Heaven, understand Hell, so by Hell (as Doctor Bishop falsely chargeth the generality of Protestants,) you really intend Heaven.

Master Broughton (as the Arch-Bishop intimates) has been too forward in owning this Opinion, which yet he might Defend, as what the words will bear, for Heaven it self may be comprized within the Notion of Hades, and [...], which is rendred Descend, though Ten times used in the Acts of the Apostles, yet in none of all these places sig­nifieth any Descending from a Higher place unto a Lower, but removing simply from one place to another.—I omit the Phrases of Descending in Praelium, in Forum, in Campum, in Amicitiam, in Causam, &c. So far the Arch-Bishop.

But though the Greek in the Apostles Creed will bear this sense yet the Article being in En­glish, [Page 22] unless by [Descending] we may understand [Ascending] and by [Hell] we may understand [Heaven,] 'twill not be easie for you to fasten this sense on the words; or to come more close to your own way of speaking, we may return your own Argument upon you. If by [went down] you mean [not went down] and if by [Hell] you mean [not Hell] we must better know what you mean before we subscribe in your sense, else you may make it lawful to subscribe to any thing in the World, and say you mean better than you speak.

That I take you right appears thus: When you speak by way of Explication, that by Hell you mean the State of separate Souls, all know that those Souls thus separated, must be Lodged somewhere, they must be either in Heaven, or in Hell, or in Limbo, or in Purgatory; and seeing 'twould be the greatest abuse to Insinuate, that you hold any other Place af­ter this Life than Heaven, and Hell, you must be­lieve that as soon as Christ's Soul was separated from His Body it went somewhere, it must be to one of these places.

If you had been of Opinion that it went to Hell, there had been no need of any Exposition; your Naked subscription, as unto an Article of Faith, [Page 23] wou'd import so much: The words are plain, [go­ing down into Hell; Descended into Hell, all know what [going down] meaneth, and all take [Hell] to signifie the place of the Damned. Thus it signified in Edward the Sixth his Days, as appears by the ad­ditional Clause, [For his Body lay in the Grave till the Resurrection, but his Soul being separate from his Body remained with the Spirits, which were detained in Prison; that is to say, in Hell, and there Preached un­to them, as witnesseth that Place of PETER,] so that the Words of our Article in Edward the Sixth's time were expressive of the Descent of Christs Soul into Hell, which, being retained by us still, must be supposed to be in the In the Synod in the days of Q. Elizabeth, the Ar­ticles, which continue still in Force, deliver the Same Descent, but without any the least Ex­plication, or Reference to any particular Place of Scripture. Bishop Peir­sons Expos. of the Creed, Ed. 4. p. 226. Same sense. The leaving out this Clause, only shew­eth, that we are not bound to believe that Christ went into Hell to Preach: But as Of the Church. lib. 5. cap. 19. Doctor Field, as thorough a Protestant, as any Dissenter in England tells us: ‘The end of Christs going down into the Hell of the Damned was only to fasten Condemnation to the Devils, [Page 24] and his Angels to Another Opinion hath ob­tained, especially in our Church, that the end for which Christ Descended into Hell, was to Tri­umph over Satan, and all the Powers below within their own Dominions. Bishop Peirson ubi sup. p. 247. See B. Bils. p. 294. Triumph over the Principalities of Darkness, to secure us from being surprized by them, and to prevent our going thither, not to fetch back any that were there al­ready.’

But that Christ Descend­ed into the Hell of the Damned was generally received by Protestants, is asserted by this Doctor: And that others of our Church are of another Opi­nion I grant; but then it doth the more strongly infer the necessity our Church lieth under of De­claring her sense of it; and that until thus much be done, the safest way of Subscription is as Chil­lingworth, Usher, and Bramhall, affirm it to be. How­ever, let the Subscription be after what manner soe­ver, it is manifest, that this Reverend Nonconforming Brother can never Subscribe this one Article in his expounded sense more honestly than we subscribe all the rest. And that notwithstanding his severi­ty against us for subscribing the 4 Controverted Ar­ticles, the Liturgy, &c. it's not over difficult to run him and his Brethren to the same straits for subscrib­ing 36, which he thinks he hath driven us unto, [Page 25] by reason of our larger subscription: We find as many Perplexities in those Articles they subscribe, as they can shew us in any they refuse; and even in this one Article I doubt not but the more Learn­ed and thoughtful amongst that Party, will see enough to Perplex them: The Learn­ed Arch-Bishop was of Opinion that it Usher ubi sup. p. 417. was too Perplexing; ‘To speak the Truth (saith he) it is a matter above the reach of the common People to enter into the Discussion of the full meaning of this Point of the Descen­sion into Hell;—He therefore leaves it to be considered by the Learned, whether any such Controverted matter, may fitly be brought in, to expound the Rule of Faith by, which being common both to the Great and Small Ones in the Church, must contain such verities only as are generally agreed upon by the common consent of all True Christians.’

Artic. 4. ‘Christ took again his Body with Flesh and Bones, and all things appertaining to the Perfection of Man's Nature, wherewith He Ascended into Heaven and there sitteth, &c.’

The words of this Article are Plain, and easie enough to be understood, for what can [Flesh, Bones, and all things Appertaining to the Perfection of [Page 26] Man's Nature] import less than what, (to use the School term) we call formally Flesh, and Bones, and it's as clear that [herewith Christ Ascended into Heaven and there he sitteth,] so that there is no need of an Exposition of this Article; where the Sense is so evident we may immediately declare our Assent, or Dissent: And this Reverend Brother instead of Explicating it, writes a confutation of it.

In your Preface you tell us, that you Subscribe them, and that you may not be Unconscionably Rash in sub­scribing, you here tell all whom it may concern, how you understand the words which you Subscribe: And under this Article, which speaks of formal Flesh, and Bones you assure us, that the Body of Christ now in Heaven is not the same thing which we call formal­ly Flesh, and Bones, your subscription therefore must be in this sense by [Flesh] you mean [not Flesh] by [Bones] you mean [not Bones] and so Subscribe to this Part of the Article that Flesh, and Bones are in Heaven: Whether any of our Church ever did, or can Subscribe in a larger sense, let the World Judge.

Artic. 6. ‘In the name of the Holy Scriptures, we understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, of whose Authority was NEVER any doubt in the Church.’

These words are as Exclusive as the wit of Man can Invent: What Books soever-therefore, of whose Au­thority there hath been any doubt in the Church, are by this Article shut out from the Number of Canonical Scriptures; and yet to this Article this Reverend Brother doth thus subscribe.

This Article excludes from the Canon all those Books, of whose Authority there have been any doubt in the Church; and you subscribe in a sense, which excludes not every such Book, so that by [Never] you mean [not Never] and in this sense sub­scribe.

If it be said that all our Clergy do the same, I answer, we do not by subscription Assent to every Article, we only Promise not to contradict them, waiting for the time in which the Church will Esta­blish our sense, or some other way give ease to the subscriber: But this worthy Person, doth expose our distinction and subscribes himself very strictly by putting this loose and contradictious sense on the Article.

I could give many other instances of this Nature, but these are enough, and yet I cannot forbear ad­ding [Page 28] one more, because this great Man hath said so much against it, and yet unawares subscribed un­to it without an Exposition.

‘The sixth Point of our Non­conformity (saith he) is a New The English Non­conformity. c. 9. Article of Faith in these words, in the Rubrick which we must pro­fess Assent and Consent unto’ [it is certain by the Word of God, that Children, which are Baptized, and Dying be­fore they Commit actual Sin, are undoubtedly Saved: This is a New Article, never made for us before 1662.

But wherein doth the New Article differ from this Assertion [That Infants being Baptized and Dying in their Infancy are by Christs Sacrifice washed from their Sins, brought to Gods Favour, and made his Children, and Inheritors of his Kingdom of Heaven.]

Both these Articles speak of Infants Baptized, and that Indefinitely, and of their Dying in their Infancy, or which is the same, before actual Sin is committed, and being washed from their Sins by Christ's Blood, brought to Gods Favour, made his Children, and Inheritors of his Kingdom of Heaven, signifie so much as that they shall be undoubtedly saved; these several expressions are a full Description of Salva­tion; I can see then no difference de re between these two Articles, and how New soever the former may [Page 29] be the latter is as Old as the Homilies of our Church, which our Clergy have subscribed above an Hun­dred Years. And if we consider in what Homily this Article is, and for what reason it is there inserted, I am inclined to think, that on an enquiry this Re­verend Person, and the Dissenting Ministers will be found to have really subscribed it.

It is in the Homily of Justification, and it is there inserted as a special ground of the Comfortableness of that wholsom Doctrine; we will therefore consult the 11th Article, which refers to this Homily, and see how far those, who subscribe to this Article do thereby Assent unto the matter of this Homily.

Artic. 11. ‘We are accounted Righteous before God, only for the Merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ by Faith, and not for our own works; or deservings.’ Wherefore, that we are justified by Faith only, is a most WHOLESOM Doctrine, and VERY FULL OF COMFORT, as more LARGELY is EXPRESSED in the Homily of Justification.

This Doctrine is a most wholesom Doctrine, and VERY FULL OF COMFORT. But in what re­spects so comfortable, what are the grounds there­of?

That we may know in what respects, & on what grounds, we are by the Article directed to the Ho­mily, [Page 30] where it is thus more largely expressed: ‘For the more full understanding the same it is our part to remember how that all the World being wrap­ped in sin by breakin of the Law, God sent his only Son, our Saviour Jesus Christ into this World, to FULFILL THE LAW FOR US, and by shedding of his most Precious Blood, to make a Sacrifice and satisfaction; or, (as it may be cal­led) amends to his Father for our sins, to asswage his Wrath and Indignation, conceived against us for the same: Insomuch, that Infants being Bapti­zed, and Dying in their Infancy, are by this Sacrifice washed from their Sins, brought to Gods Favour, and made his Children, and Inheritors of his Kingdom of Heaven.’

Here then is the Article, and a part of the Homily; the Article holds, that the Doctrine of Justification is very full of comfort, as expressed more largely in the Homily: The Homily tells us, that for the more full un­derstanding hereof we must remember how Christ has fulfilled the Law for us, made himself a Sacrifice, insomuch that Baptized Infants Dying in their Infancy, shall by Christs Blood be washed from their Sins and saved. Now this is a very great ground of joy, and hereby the Doctrine of Justification is become the more a­bundantly comfortable; and by subscribing to this [Page 31] Article thus worded, we also subscribe unto this Ho­mily, that is to say, as the Article is an Epitome of the Homily, and the Homily an Explanation of the Homily, and the Homily an Explanation of the Article in subscribing to the former, we subscribe to the Doctrine contained in the latter. In subscribing to the Article we subscribe to every Doctrine in this Homily, that sets forth the comfortableness of Justi­fication through Jesus Christs Merits by Faith alone; and herein doth the Homily shew the comfortable­ness of this Doctrine by assuring us that all our Chil­dren that have been Baptized, Dying in their Infan­cy, are saved: So that this Reverend N. Conform­ing Brother subscribing to this part of the 11th. Article, closes with the very Doctrine for which he so much condemns our Clergy.

I have insisted thus long on the subscriptions of our Dissenting Brethren, that whilst we present our hum­ble supplications to the Convocation for Redress, they may see that there is no reason for their Re­proaching us with our subscriptions.

That our Clergy, notwithstanding their Unani­mous subscribing the same Articles, have different thoughts about them, is not denied by any of us.

That this may be without falling under the Odi­ous Guilt of Equivocation and Mental Reserves is cleared by the distinction there is between Articles [Page 32] of Peace, and Articles of Faith. By subscribing we think we are not obliged tobelieve them, but only not to contradict, or oppose them.

That this our sense is not allowed by the Church is more than we dare be positive in. There are three great Worthies of our Communion who doubt it not; and we have oft in Publick-Prints declared our sense without Rebuke or Controul; and if not­withstanding, the Church is against our Sense, we cannot be Censured for Equivocation, the utmost can be said against us is, that we have mistaken the Churches sence, which is not so great a Crime as the declaring Assent to an Article when really we do not believe it to be true.

However, that there are difficulties attending our Way is yielded, and the Arguments against it so strong, that on a Review, from a fear that our Subscription signifies our Assent to every subscribed Article, many Perplexities arise in our Minds: For which Reason, we do most Humbly beseech both Houses of Convoca­tion to take this Case into their Consideration, that what in their Great Wisdom they think meet for the Peace and Quiet of the Minds of many Godly and Learned Divines, True and Obedient Sons of the Church may in this matter be done.