These are those sober counsels, and seasonable advices, with which Calvin and Beza endeavoured to qualify, and possess the minds of Protestant people, whenever they found in them any the least tendency toward a separation. I have before observed,* that Beza did good service to the Church of England, in giving the like advice to some discontented persons here, who were so aggrieved at the ceremonies, that they had thoughts of forsaking the communion of the Church upon it. But Beza being consulted about that matter, better advised them. He told them plainly," Possunt ac etiam debent multa tolerari, quæ tamen recte non præcipiuntur," &c. Many things not only may, but ought to be tolerated, which are not rightly enjoined. Therefore my first answer is, that though it is not rightly done, to bring back those garments into the Church again, at least, in my opinion; yet seeing they are not of that kind of things, which are impious in themselves, they do not seem to me to be of that moment, as that either the pastors thereupon should forsake their ministry, rather than wear them, or the flocks forego their public food, rather than hear their pastors preaching in such garments.-Those things which the pastors have no power to alter, let them hear with, rather than by deserting their churches, give occasion to Satan to introduce greater, and more dangerous evils, which is the thing he so earnestly drives at. And to the people our advice is, that so long as the doctrine continues uncorrupt, they should, notwithstanding these things, hear it attentively, and use the Sacraments religiously, &c. Ep. xii. p. 107, 108.

He gives the same advice, with respect to church music, the cross in baptism; the interrogatories used in baptism; the use of unleavened bread, and kneeling at the Lord's supper. "Since these things are not idolatrous in themselves, I think the same of them, as of those before mentioned:" that is, neither the ministers should forsake their calling, nor the people the communion of the Church, though they did not altogether like or approve of those things.

* Book i. c. 5.

These are undeniable proofs, that, at least, in the opinion of Calvin and Beza, some defects are to be tolerated in all Churches, and that separation is not to be made upon the account of such inconveniencies, as it may be better to bear with, than raise a schism in the Church about them.

I must further observe, that the French Church upon this principle, ever professed a readiness to join in communion with the Lutheran Churches, notwithstanding many more, either real, or supposed defects, than can be objected to the Church of England. For, we are told, the Lutherans receive the use of exorcism in baptism, and the name of the mass for the Eucharist, and stone altars instead of communion tables; that they celebrate in unleavened bread, and have some hymns sung in the Latin tongue; that they retain images for history, in their Churches, and require auricular confession in some sort, with other things of the like nature. Not to mention their doctrines of consubstantiation, ubiquity, &c. which are known errors, commonly embraced by persons of that communion. Yet, notwithstanding all this, the French Churches are so far from encouraging a separation from the Lutheran Churches, that they themselves have ever most heartily, and readily, as they had occasion, communicated with them. Calvin not only subscribed the Augsburgh confession, as he himself tells us in his Epistle to Scalingius,* but says further, that it was both Bucer's opinion, and his own, that there was no just cause to divide from Luther upon the account of those external observances, which he retained in the Church.

And Alting assures us, this was the common opinion of the reformed divines, who followed Bucer and Calvin. For proposing this question in his problems, whether the orthodox may lawfully communicate in the Lord's supper with the Lutherans? He resolves it in the affirmative, upon these four arguments. 1. Because they all agree in fundamentals

Ep. Schalingio. p. 113. Nec vero Augustanam confessionem repudio, cui pridem volens ac libens, subscripsi, sicuti eam auctor ipse intepretatus est.

+ Ep. Farello. p. 39. Non patitur Bucerus, ut ob externas illas observatiunculas a Luthero disjungamur. Nec sane justas esse puto dissidii causas.

VOL. VIII.

T

4. Be

2. Because men ought to preserve unity in the Church, and hate schism. 3. Because we have the example of the Prophets, and of Christ and his Apostles for communicating in more corrupt Churches than the Lutherans are. cause the best divines of the last age have approved it, as Capito, Bucer, Calvin, Martyr, Zanchy, Ursin, Tossanus, Paræus, Scultetus, and others; some of whom, as they had occasion, did actually communicate with them. Alting, Theol. Problem. Par. 2. Probl. 18. p. 331.

Mr. Quick himself tells us, that Monsieur Toussaint, pastor of the Church of Orleans, being driven into Germany by the heat of Persecution, joined himself readily with the Churches there, and spake honourably of their communion, even when he was cited before Brentius, Jacobus Andreas, and other divines of Stutgard, to give an account of his preaching. He told them, the poor Churches of France breathed after peace with them, and with all the Churches of the Augustan confession, and had written for it, and prayed for it, and these last ten years spilt no other ink but their own blood in defence of the truth. Quick Introduct. to the Synodicon. p. 59.

But we have a greater testimony than all these, which is the determination of the National Synod of Tonneins, 1614. Cap. 18.* Where treating of expedients for reuniting the Protestant Churches, they say, Art. 13. "There are some points in difference betwixt us and the Lutheran Churches, wherein our agreement is very easy; of this nature are the ceremonies of the Lutheran Churches, which may be excused, and tolerated, because they are matters of decency, not necessity."

And again, art. 27. "If a man communicate at the Lord's table with a person that errs in the doctrine of predestination, or about the nature of Jesus Christ, or, who believes that the body of our Lord is every where, in all places at once; although this error be very great, yet may it not trouble him, who is a communicant with him.-And as for those external ceremonies used, and practised by the Luthe

There is a like decree in the second Synod of Charenton, Chap. xxii. p. 297.

rans, we have no such difference, but what may be easily composed."

The same proposal was made in the Synod of Vitre, 1583, chap. iv. p. 153. in the name of the King of Navarre, and Mr. Chardieu was appointed to negotiate the matter with the German Churches.

The proposal was again renewed in the Synod of Gap, 1603. chap. vi. p. 239, where the Assembly ordered letters to be dispatched to the Universities of England, Germany, Scotland, Geneva, Basil and Leyden, and to Messieurs de Gordon and Fontaines in London, intreating them to join with them in effecting the same holy union; and that princes may be engaged to put forth their authority herein, that so they might be more firmly united among themselves in the confession of one and the same doctrine.*

These are truly healing principles indeed, and proper expedients for peace and union. And would all dissenters from the Church of England but consent to govern themselves by these principles, and pursue the methods proposed by the Synod of Tonneins, I dare be bold to say in the words of that Synod, that the difference about the ceremonies used, and practised in our Church, might easily be composed. For they might excuse and tolerate them at least, if not approve, and justify them. Our Church's practice, admitting it to be faulty, is not more corrupt than the Lutherans, nor her communion more unlawful than theirs: and if by the principles of the French Church, a man may safely communicate with the Lutherans, notwithstanding their errors and faults, both in doctrine, and practice, which are apparently greater than any can be pretended in the Church of England; I see not why, upon the same principles it will not follow, that the communion of the Church

* See also the third Synod of Rochel, chap. i. p. 263.

F. Turretin, de necessariâ secessione ab Eccles. Romanâ. Disput. viii. n. 33. p. 234.

Mat. Bochart. Diallecticon. Sedan. 1662, 8vo.-It. His dialogue about the difficulties raised by the missionaries on account of the Synod of Charenton, 1631, tolerating the communion of Lutherans.

Sam. Bochart. Resp. ad Jesuitam le Barre de tolerandis Lutheranis, 1661.

of England is by all means to be embraced, and separation to be avoided, even though it were proved that there were some things faulty, either in the Church's doctrine, or practice which might admit of a regular and seasonable reformation. And having said this, I conclude, that whatever way we consider this matter, the communion of the Church of England is justified, and the objections of dissenters truly answered, upon the principles of the French Church; which either herself practises the very same things that are excepted against in our communion, as I have proved in most instances she does, or else commends and approves what she does not practise; or, at least, allows them, as things tolerable, and such as may be borne with, rather than divide communion, and break the Church's peace: which were the things I at first undertook to shew from the acts, and decrees of the French National Synods, which are the greatest authority of the reformed Church of France.