of CONFoRMITY. of their Minery andOrdinances, nay, and even the pofbility of their falvation, &c. Such ®bfervations a thefe, made many of the Laity think, that there was no fmall danger ofencouraging them in their rigours, and affuming pretenfons, by an adherence andfülmion to them, Therefore, it was their Duty to fepa- rate from them into diflinä Churches. I fhall not think this laft Plea worthy of a repetition, or a fecond thought ; and, therefore, íhall here (before I refume the Confideration of the other Arguments) only ask the Perlon who bath thought fit to load the Caufe with this Invec'live, Is this an Argument fit to be urged in de- fence ofa Separation, or not ? It it be not (as, I verily believe, He thinks it is not ) Why is it produced by one that pretends to ftudy peace, and reconciliation ? why is it propofed as a firong and fufficient reafon? why is it urged without any confideration , or any reflexion upon the weaknefs of it, and without any an- tidote againft the poiíbn of it ? Is it no matter upon what Grounds the People divide intodiftint Churches ? Are they to be fupported and carrefFed in all their molt unreafonable and foolish prejudi- ces ? 77 4,mompris
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=