$7

MATTHEW W R E N, D. D.

. To the ninth Article, this Defendant anfwereth and faith, that he diddirect, there should be no Difference of ringing to Church, when thereWas a Sermon, more than when there was none, excepting the Knells for Fu-nerals. And he humbly conceiveth, that it was very agreeable to Reason,Prudence, Piety, and good Order so to do. Thereby to take away, as muchas he might, that evil Custom which many had taken up, of making a Schismbetween the Use of publick Prayer and Preaching; of which Fault he findsthat Richard Bishop of London , inquired expressly in his Articles, in theYear 1605. For, by the Difference which they did put between those two,they did labour to prefer the one to the other, whereas they ought ever to goequally together in all holy Esteem.

He therefore denieth, that it was done to hinder the People in their goodUesires of serving God, and edifying their Souls; but quite contrary, to fur-ther and advantage them in the fame ; for that the giving of different Noticeby the Bells, had by indiscreet and factious People been drawn to an Oppor-tunity of expressing their Contempt of the Divine Service of the Church,and of separating themselves from their Brethren in the holy Service of God,to the great Hazard of their Souls, and to the manifest Dishonour of AlmightyGod.

This Defendant therefore considering with himself, that all People wereby the Law (both of God Man) bound to repair to their Parish Churches, atall Times appointed ; and that being there, the Sermon could in no Reasonbe less welcome to them, but rather the more welcome, although they,by any Distinction of ringing, knew not thereof, before .they came thi-ther ; he could no Way doubt, but that his episcopal Authority and Dis-cretion might well reach to the setting of a Rule for the ringing of Bells,Wherein every Sexton thought himself fit enough to be the Disposer of, athis own Pleasure. And many of the Ministers had of themselves taken thatvery fame Order for ringing, thereby to keep their People from gadding.

As to this, that People, by Notice of the Bells, did apply themselves tothe Service of God in those Places, where both Prayer and Preaching was tobe ; this Defendant anfwereth, that this Pretence can have no Colour at allin the Country Parishes, nor in any Place of the Diocese, Ipswich and Nor-wich, and one or two other Towns more, excepted, in which there beingsundry Parish Churches, tney might readily leave one and take to another jwhich yet, he humbly conceiveth, the Law doth not allow. And he is thebolder to call it a Pretence, because the true Use that was made of that Di-stinction of ringing, was not to come to the Service of God at all, if thereWere no Sermon, but to stay at home, or to betake themselves to private Con-venticles and unlawful Assemblies. Nevertheless, the Order which this De-fendant herein directed was general, and therefore did no more concernChurches where no Sermon was, than where there was constant Preachinge very Sunday.

As for Sermons and Preaching in what Value and Account they ever were^th this Defendant, among many other Arguments (as he hopeth) it dotha Ppear by this, and all other his Directions, in that he ever reckon'd the Ser-mon as a true and proper Part of God’s divine Worship, and of the publickservice, and thereupon did often advise, that after the Sermon, the Collectshould ever be said [ Grant we beseech thee , that the Words which we have heard

!s with our outward Ears, &c.]

To the tenth Article, this Defendant anfwereth and denieth, that he didorbid Mr. Devereux, or Mr. Swaine, or any other, to preach preparatoryd'mons to the Communion, but should have been ready to have directed

them