they will follow Mr. Baxter's judgment, ought to attend upon Him,and ought not to affert their Right to chufe their own Paftour. Now which of your People will be judged by this Rule? And where is that fingle Perfon amongst them all, that hath acted upon thefe Principles, and left his Parish-Minifter, and chofen another for his Paftour, only on these accounts? Hardly to be found, I dare say, throughout the Land: For it is too manifeft, that they run, without distinction, from all as well as fome; nay, that multitudes of them have never fo much as endeavour'd to hear their Established Minifter, or to fatisfy themselves whether He be qualified, or not. And fo it appears, that the Practice of your People is such as cannot be defended by this Argument; and therefore, that this Argument fignifies nothing to their Vindication, Efpecially, confidering that it is their Separation, their providing for themselves in a way diftinct from the Established way, you are now defending. For I ask, Suppofing that they may upon these accounts, or any other, leave their ParishMinifter, yet where is the neceffity of leaving the Church of England? How

doth

doth this Argument prove that they ought to betake themselves to Separate Congregations, with new Modes of Wor. fhip, and new Forms of Government? Is there no Minister of the Established Church near them,to whom they can refort, fufficient, and qualified enough to inftruct, and guide them? And, Is it not as easy, and as lawful, for them to go to fuch an one, as to one of the Separate way? Or, Muft we take your word for it, without the leaft fhadow of a Reason for your faying fo, That without fubmitting in many Parishes to Unqualified Guides, there is no room left by the Law for Ministerial Inftruction, and Paftoral help? Which one thing if you will prove, I promife to become your Convert. But you cannot, and you know you cannot, and therefore you ought not to have faid it. And if there be no neceffity for Separation on this account, granting it true, That fundry of the Parifb-Minifters are infufficient; then the Practice of your People still remains without a Vindication. And that You, and They, may be ftill more fenfible, that there is no fuch neceffity on this account, I fhall obferve,

5. That

5. That, fuppofing an unqualified Minifter fettled in a Parish, His Parishioners are not presently in fo defperate a condition as you reprefent them to be in. They are not obliged to give up themfelves blindly to his direction, and to receive whatever He preaches, or teaches, with an implicit faith. This is a Popish, and not a Proteftant Doctrine, nor ever yet taught, or admitted in the Church of England. His People (as I have had often an occafion to obferve) are fecure of a Liturgy adapted to all the purposes of Publick Worship, and of many Portions of God's Word delivered to them in it, by means of which, they may attend upon God to his Glory, and their own Edification. So that, in this Church, The great bufinefs of Religious Affemblies is render'd much more ufeful to the People, and much more agreeable to the Nature, and Design of them, than it can poffibly be in that Form of Publick Worship which you have encouraged in the Land. And you your felves cannot pretend a defect, in this conftant appointed Service, of any thing neceffary to Salvation; or any thing in it deftructive of it. And this is their certain entertainment, however infuffici

infufficient their Minifter be; which is a great, and unfpeakable happiness to a Land, how lightly foever you teach your People to think of it. The main point between us relates to their conftant attendance upon the Publick Worship in the Established way: And we fee, They may conftantly attend upon it without endangering their Salvation, if they be truly serious themselves: And if they may, why fhould they not? For private helps and affiftances, none are forbidden to them, as I know of. They are not confined to the Writings, or Advice, or Directions, of any particular Man, but are at liberty to apply themselves to whom they see fit. But, if they will not be content with this, but will leave the Publick Miniftrations of their ownParishMinifter because they think Him unqualified, ftill here is no neceffity for a Separation. It is one thing to leave the teaching of one particular Man, and another thing to leave the Church in which He Minifters, and to fet up other Churches in oppofition to it. It is to be hoped, that there may be Minifters of the Established Church, within fome convenient distance from them, qualified to preach to them.

And

And Mr. Calamy tells us, That if they go Abridg. to another Parish, the inconvenience is not P. 547. great; not fo great, I am fure, by many degrees, as what must follow upon their fetting up Separate Churches. Whence then arifes any neceffity of a Separate Ministry, and Separate Churches, and distinct Modes of Publick Worship, if it be fo, that the People may attend conftantly upon the Service in the Established Church, and yet neither hazard their Salvation, nor fubmit to Unqualified Guides? And confequently how little doth this contribute to their juftification? I have already spoken fomething on this Argument, taken from Unqualified Minifters, when I confidered it with relation to your own Practice: And fo, fhall add no more here, but argue a little with upon what I have now laid down.

you

If, then, this Right, we are fpeaking of, be a Right with which your People not only may, but ought in duty to part, upon weighty Confiderations, (as I have fhewn from their own practice, and your own Conceffions) why ought they not to part with it, as well in the Established way, as in a Separate way? Or, what Motives are there to induce them L

PART II.

to