Of CONFORMITY. I reprefents it to be your Opinion, That whatfoever Hands in need of Amendment requires your Separation, which is contrary to the inward fenfe of Mr. Baxter, and the Moderate Diffenters. And there- fore Separation is unlawful. Nor will the private exprefflon ofa different fenfe, be a fufficientguardagainfi uchpublick,andmore forcible Language of continued Pra5lice. If you fay, This is not a Circumftance ofyour Separation; I fay, Neither would the other be a Circumffance ofyour Confiant Commu- nion. If you deny that this makes your Separation unlawful; give me leave to deny, that the other would make your Confiant Communion unlawful. But, 2. Confiant Cornmunion,you fay,pracli- ralÿ betraysyour Liberty, in compliance with rigorous Impofers : and therefore, is unlaw- ful. T anfwer, No more, than fuck a Con- ¡tant Communion as you were ready to exercife, had the Liturgy been amended to your minds. Conftant Conformity in kneeling at the Communion is no more a betraying your Liberty, than Confiant Con- formity, in the ufe of a Liturgy. Nor is Confiant Conformity to the uièofour Li- turgy as it is now, any more a betraying your Liberty, than Con ant Conformity to 9
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=