<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2010-01-15</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>John Pas</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Checklist:
x Add TEMPHEAD, change DATE, validate
x Add DIV TYPEs, validate
x Review structure, use FRONT, BODY, BACK or rarely GROUP
x Check PB placement and completeness, ensure sequence of N=""
x Proof title page(s)
x Check HEAD TRAILER ARGUMENT EPIGRAPH BIBL OPENER CLOSER SIGNED SALUTE BYLINE
x Check ^, oe, abq, italic I / J, _Initals, space between &amp;c.
x Check # @ -- UNCLEAR LB FIGURE -|
x Check q; startq endq Q
x Check all GAPs and quire signatures
x Check ligatures if in blackletter &abper; &abpro; &abus; &abquod; &absed; &abser; &abcon; &abrum; &abis; and any miscellaneous ABBR's
x Z's: medial capital Z's and final z's if in blackletter
x f&s; / &s;f
x accented letters
x if in Latin and blackletter, check for words broken across lines
x ot / ol / of and tr / tb / th
x Correct illegibles from proofsheet
x Check for &punc; in the middle of words
x Check illegible page, para, line, span, word, dollar signs
x Final validate

Corrected [  ] illegible groups out of [  ].
Converted [  ] illegible groups to GAP DESC="illegible".
DONE</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A88105">
<STC T="W">L1883</STC>
<STC T="T">E333_2</STC>
<STC T="T">E333_3</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99861406</BIBNO>
<VID>130535</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>LIGHT FOR SMOKE: OR, A CLEARE AND DISTINCT REPLY by IOHN LEY, One of the A&s;&s;embly of Divines at WESTMINSTER, TO A DARKE AND CONFVSED An&s;wer in a Booke made, and intituled <HI>The Smoke in the Temple,</HI> by <HI>Iohn Saltmar&s;h,</HI> late Preacher at <HI>Bra&s;teed</HI> in <HI>Kent,</HI> now revolted both from his Pa&s;to|rall calling and charge.</P>
<Q><BIBL><HI>P&s;al. 37. ver&s;. 6.</HI></BIBL>
<P>He &s;hall bring forth thy righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e as the light, and thy iudgement as the noone day.</P></Q>
<P>Whereto is added, <HI>Novello-ma&s;tix,</HI> or a Scourge for a &s;currilous News-monger.</P>
<P><HI>LONDON,</HI> Printed by <HI>I. L.</HI> for <HI>Chri&s;topher Meredith,</HI> at the &s;igne of the Crane in <HI>Pauls</HI> Church-yard. 1646.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="dedication">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>TO THE RIGHT VVORSHIPFVL, Sr. VVILLIAM STRICKLAND KNIGHT, and HERBOTTLE GRIMSTON E&s;quire, two worthy Members of the Honourable Hou&s;e of COMMONS.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>Right worthy Sirs,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_I Pre&s;ented you with a former Booke again&s;t M^r. <HI>Saltm.</HI> his Remora to the Reformation in hand, as I did other mine honoured and worthy friends; this I offer to your view as to Judges of the difference betwixt him and me, as it hath been a gradu|ate by the pre&s;&s;e from an <HI>An&s;wer</HI> to <HI>Reply,</HI> from that to a <HI>Rejoynder,</HI> where for the pre&s;ent the period is fix|ed,
<PB REF="3">and for my part it &s;hall be to me as an Herculean pillar, (beyond which I will not &s;ayle) and this re&s;o|lution with my Rea&s;ons I have imparted to M^r. <HI>Saltm.</HI> in a particular Epi&s;tle to him&s;elfe. But though I pro|ceed no further with him in the reciprocation of Re|plyes, you may be plea&s;ed, having acquaintance with him, as he maketh his addre&s;&s;es to you, or as any op|portunitie pre&s;enteth him before you, to contribute &s;ome of your di&s;creet coun&s;els for better imploy|ment of his parts and pen, then in crying downe that Di&s;cipline and Government, as terrible and ty|rannicall, which the prudent Senators of both the Honourable Hou&s;es of Parliament in part have &s;et up, and further endeavour to advance; and in dam|ning the maintenance of Mini&s;ters as <HI>Antichri&s;tian</HI> and <HI>Iewi&s;h,</HI> which the &s;ame authoritie by many ancient Acts, and your &s;elves with your Honourable A&s;&s;o|ciats by a late Ordinance have e&s;tabli&s;hed.</P>
<P>For the former, I profe&s;&s;e unto you, it is matter of wonder unto me, how any man can have the face to make &s;uch out-cryes again&s;t the Government, as he and &s;ome others doe, as if it were more formidable then Prelaticall domination in the highe&s;t degree; when every Bi&s;hop by his own power &s;et out Articles in his Vi&s;itation, concerning all aberrations from Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall Canons, whether &s;innes or no &s;innes, and by a meere Arbitrary power made many times crimes of duties, as preaching in the afternoone of the Sab|bath day; and duties of crimes, as Reading the Book for Recreations and &s;ports on that Day; and conven|ted, and cen&s;ured all &s;orts of per&s;ons, (by his &s;ole Ju|ri&s;diction) &s;entencing whom he would to &s;u&s;pen&s;ion,
<PB REF="3">and excommunication, impo&s;ed Orders of Penance with ordinary Fees, and extraordinary Commutati|ons, &s;ometimes at no le&s;&s;e then 100 or 200 pound price; be&s;ides the additionall power of Ju&s;tice-&s;hip of Peace, and the High Commi&s;&s;ion, whereby the two Archbi&s;hops, and as many as in either Province they made choice of, to be A&s;&s;e&s;&s;ors to them on that dreadfull Tribunall puni&s;hed, as they thought meet, with fine and impri&s;onment, with great fines, and long impri&s;onment, many times for &s;mall faults, and &s;ometimes for none at all; whereby &s;ome of them carryed their concurrent authoritie with &s;uch cun|ning, that mo&s;t were overawed by it, knowing it was great and various, and not knowing, for the mo&s;t part, when they did act by one power, when by an|other.</P>
<P>And can our Anti-presbyterian oppo&s;ites &s;ay that any &s;ingle Presbyter, any Presbytery Parochiall, Cla&s;|&s;icall, or Provinciall, a&s;&s;ume any &s;uch juri&s;diction, or power, either over mens per&s;ons or e&s;tates? Is not &s;u&s;pen&s;ion from the Sacrament, and Excommunica|tion from the Church the utmo&s;t authoritie they claime? and is this any more then they that both con|demne, and contemne the Presbytery, of their own free-will, or &s;elf-will doe unto them&s;elves?</P>
<P>It is &s;aid by &s;ome, that to &s;et up Presbytery in &s;tead of Prelacy is to multiplie Clergie ma&s;ters over the people, and for one Bi&s;hop in a Dioce&s;&s;e to &s;et up ma|ny, in &s;ome no fewer then a thou&s;and for one; But they &s;hould con&s;ider that all the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall autho|rity of a Dioce&s;&s;e united in one Bi&s;hop, as in an Epi&s;co|pall
<PB REF="4">Sea, was as the river<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Cyrus Gynden late fu&s;um amnem vado tran|&s;ire tentavit: ibt unus ex equis qui trahere re|gium currum albi &s;olcbant, abreptus, vehementer commovit regem. Juravit itaque amnem illum regiis equis meatum aufereutem, co &s;e redactu|rum, ut tran&s;iri, calcarique etiam a foeminis po&s;|&s;et. Huc deinde omnem tran&s;tulit belli appara|tum, &amp; tamdiu a&s;&s;edit operi, donec centum &amp; octoginta cuniculis divi&s;um alveum in trecentos &amp; &s;exaginta rivos di&s;pergeret &amp; fiecum relin|queret, in diver&s;um fluentibus aquis. <HI>Senec. de ita, lib. 3. cap. 21. pag. 448.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Gyn|des</HI> very deepe, and of a boy&s;te|rous &s;treame, as when it drown|ed the white Hor&s;e that drew the Charet of <HI>Cyrus,</HI> but being divided among &s;o many Mini|&s;ters, or Presbyters, it is as the &s;ame River, when <HI>Cyrus</HI> enra|ged at the lo&s;&s;e, and meaning to be revenged of it, cau&s;ed it to be divided into three hundred and &s;ixtie channels.</P>
<P>And yet is not every Presbyter (though a Bi&s;hop) as a Prelate in his own Pari&s;h, that is, endowed with &s;ole power of cen&s;ures, for others are to be joyned in admini&s;tration of Government with him, in many places many for one, and in no place under a double number.</P>
<P>As for the right of Presbytery, whether it be Di|vine, or humane, I conceive, if the Que&s;tion were rightly &s;tated, and the officers their power, dutie, qua|lifications? and admini&s;trations clearly di&s;tingui&s;hed, tho&s;e that are in extremes for their Tenets, whether holding all of it, or none of it to be of Divine right, would be eafily convinced of an errour, and a Tenure would be found out, and made good, wherein Chri&s;t might have his due to the full, without any diminuti|on of the Magi&s;trates ju&s;t Authoritie, or of any liber|tie which truly might be called Chri&s;tian.</P>
<P>For the latter concerning the unlawfulne&s;&s;e of Tythes, if his Tenet now be right, his taking of them before was wrong; and the &s;ame con&s;titution
<PB REF="4">of con&s;cience, which makes him now to renounce them, may make him at lea&s;t to doubt whether he be not bound to returne what he hath received of the Pari&s;hioners of <HI>Bra&s;teed</HI> in that kinde into their hands againe, by vertue of that received Rule of<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Non remitti|tur peccatum ni|&s;i re&s;tituatur ab|latum. <HI>Augu&s;t. Epi&s;t. 54. ad Macedon. pag. 280.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> in his Epi&s;tle to <HI>Macedonius, The &s;inne is not remitted, unle&s;&s;e the goods that are wrong fully taken be re&s;tored.</HI></P>
<P>And if he appeare before you againe, you may doe well to put &s;uch a ca&s;e of con&s;cience to his con&s;ide|ration. For my part I am &s;orry to &s;ee him &s;o un&s;etled in his judgement, &s;o &s;edulous in his endeavours (un|der pretence of Evangelicall calmene&s;&s;e, and meek|ne&s;&s;e, and moderation of &s;pirit) to prepare a Patro|nage for all wild and wicked fancies, that every man may beleeve what he li&s;t, and live as he beleeveth, and &s;o may doe what is right in his own eyes, that is, what|&s;oever is wrong in the eyes of God and of all good men, as if there were no King in I&s;rael, <HI>Iudges</HI> 17.6. that is, no Government (for then the Kingly power over that people was not &s;et up.)</P>
<P>But the cure of this belongs to the care of your &s;elves, and your Honourable Colleagues, for whom it is our parts, whom God hath placed under your power and protection, unce&s;&s;antly to &s;upplicate to the throne of Grace, that as you have pulled down the remainders, and removed the rubbi&s;h of ruined Babel from among us, &s;o you may in Gods good time (and the &s;ooner the better) &s;et up in &s;tead thereof &s;uch a faire, and goodly frame of Church-government, from the foundation to the top-&s;tone, as may be entertained with &s;houting, not of a party onely, as at the laying of
<PB REF="5">the foundation of the Temple, <HI>Ezra</HI> 3.11, 12, 13. but of all &s;orts both old and young; and to this publique devotion (wherein you have your &s;ociable &s;hare, as you have a part of the common care and providence for the welfare of three Kingdomes) I &s;hall adde my private &s;upplications for your pro&s;peritie in particu|lar, and to them my &s;incere endeavours,</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED><HI>To be faithfully and affectionately yours in any acceptable &s;ervice,</HI> IOHN LEY.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="table of contents">
<PB REF="5">
<HEAD>The Contents.</HEAD>
<LIST>
<ITEM><HI>Section 1.</HI> OF the Title <HI>Independent,</HI> in what &s;ence it is di&s;claimed, in what acknowledged: and of &s;ubordination denied by <HI>M^r. S.</HI> and purity in the Church held nece&s;&s;ary by him. <HI>p. 1.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 2.</HI> The Objection of un&s;ea&s;onablene&s;&s;e of Ma&s;ter <HI>Saltm.</HI> his Quere ju&s;tified, and his gro&s;&s;e mi&s;take, or wilfull fal&s;ification of my words detected <HI>p. 4.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 3.</HI> Rom. <HI>14.23. What&s;oever is not of faith is &s;in,</HI> no barre to the e&s;tabli&s;hment of the Pre&s;byteriall government; Ma&s;ter <HI>Saltm.</HI> his di&s;tinction of a State and publique con&s;cience and a per&s;onall con|&s;cience. <HI>p. 5.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 4.</HI> Ma&s;ter <HI>Saltm.</HI> his unequall dealing in di&s;tributing his owne and his adver&s;aries worke: The Pre&s;bytery not like Prelacie in unwarrantablene&s;&s;e by the word of God. Of <HI>Prudence</HI> how farre of lawfull u&s;e in religious matters. <HI>p. 8.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 5.</HI> Whether Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, and Nationall Pre&s;by|teries be like the Independents gathering of Churches. <HI>p. 11.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 6.</HI> It is unrea&s;onable to require an undertaking that the be&s;t government in con&s;titution &s;hould be faultle&s;&s;e in execution; Tyranny more to be feared in Independencie then in Pre&s;byterie. <HI>p. 13.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 7.</HI> Of the power of the Pre&s;byterie for reformation of man|ners, compared with Prelacy; the evill effects of Independency; the difference betwixt a Di&s;cipline, and the Di&s;cipline; <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his precipitancy in writing, and in divulging what he hath written of Popery in the Covenant, or under the Covenant. <HI>p. 15.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 8.</HI> Tythes not Jewi&s;h and Popi&s;h, as <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> pretendeth. <HI>pag. 19.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 9.</HI> Of <HI>M^r. Colemans</HI> ob&s;ervation of the Church of <HI>Scotland. pag. 21.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 10.</HI> A compari&s;on of young men and old for prudence and coun&s;ell. Of vi&s;ions and dreames; where <HI>Ioel 2.28. &amp; Act. 2.17.</HI> are vindicated from <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his mi&s;taking, and mi&s;application of them. <HI>p. 23.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 11.</HI> Ma&s;ter <HI>Saltm.</HI> his in&s;ufficient an&s;wer, and figurative trifling unworthy of an an&s;wer. <HI>p. 28.</HI></ITEM>
<PB REF="6">
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 12.</HI> A compari&s;on of Pre&s;byterians and Independents in point of &s;trictne&s;&s;e, and loo&s;ene&s;&s;e in admi&s;&s;ion of members; Of the mixture in the Church of <HI>Corinth.</HI> p. <HI>29.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 13.</HI> To whom Chri&s;t is an head, and how; of his rod of iron and his golden &s;cepter; and of his being a Lord, and a &s;ervant; gentle, yet terrible. <HI>p. 21.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 14.</HI> The Pre&s;byteriall government not un&s;utable to the con|dition of Chri&s;t; the prevailing of Independents, and of the &s;ects that meete in Independencie much more terrible then the Pre&s;byteriall Go|vernment can be. <HI>p. 33.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 15.</HI> A plea&s;ant reproofe of a mi&s;aepplication of Scripture is no offence again&s;t the Maje&s;ty of the Word; how, and in what ca&s;es a taunting &s;peech may be allowed. <HI>p. 39.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 16.</HI> Of the Pre&s;byteriall and Independent Government how affected; The &s;low proceeding of the Church Government made no argument for it, nor mentioned to the disparagement of the Par|liament; <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> brings the Parliaments Authoritie under po|pular libertie; Of wheat in the Independent Congregations. <HI>p. 42.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 17.</HI> The &s;ettling of Government fal&s;ly &s;ugge&s;ted to be here|tic all with an implicit reproach upon the Parliament. Of the truth of <HI>Sleydans</HI> &s;tory of the Anabapti&s;ts in <HI>Germany.</HI> A ra&s;h cen&s;ure of <HI>Luther,</HI> and the <HI>Lutherans</HI> in <HI>Germany</HI> for oppo&s;ing them. A caveat to <HI>England</HI> to take warning by <HI>Germany.</HI> The Mini&s;ters practi&s;e &s;landered, and the Magi&s;trate di&s;honoured by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> p. <HI>47.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 18.</HI> The Toleration de&s;ired by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> neither &s;afe nor &s;ound, oppo&s;ite to the mind of <HI>Paul, 1 Cor. 1.10. Cal 5.10.12.</HI> Of the compari&s;on of the two ambitious Brethren to ten more humble and moderate; The Pre&s;bytery not proved by Magi&s;trates, though ap|proved by them; Of the pretended truth of Sectaries, and of the pre|&s;cription of Bi&s;hops and Independents. <HI>p. 51.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 19.</HI> Of the pretended mode&s;ty and humility of the Indepen|dents, by way of compari&s;on with the Pre&s;byterians. <HI>p. 54.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect 20.</HI> Whether Chri&s;t, if he would have a nationall compre|hen&s;ive Church, was bound to have begun the practice of it over whole Kingdomes, as <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> &s;aith; and whether importeth more pride, to de&s;ire a &s;ubordination of A&s;&s;emblies, Parochiall, Cla&s;&s;icall, &amp;c. or to be adver&s;e to it. <HI>p. 57.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 21.</HI> Ma&s;ter <HI>Saltm.</HI> his mi&s;take touching the building of the
<PB REF="6">Temple. Of the difference of the patterne of the Temple, and the pat|terne of the Government of the Gospel. Ma&s;ter. <HI>Saltm.</HI> confu&s;edly jumbleth them together. <HI>p. 60.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 22</HI> Of &s;taying for the Spirit to give light of in&s;truction to the reformation of the Church. <HI>p. 63.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 23.</HI> Of expedition or delay in &s;etting up of Government; Whether <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> the Jewi&s;h and Chri&s;tian State be &s;o contrary, that there is no conformitie betweene them. <HI>p. 65.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 24</HI> Truth not to be parted with for peace, the Magi&s;trate di&s;honoured, and the Pre&s;byterians &s;landered by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> p <HI>68.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 25</HI> The Magi&s;trates a&s;&s;i&s;tance to the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Go|vernment no argument to prove it no Go&s;pel Government; the &s;word of God and of <HI>Gideon,</HI> of Church Di&s;cipline and Civill &s;everity, how lawfull and u&s;efull; zeale again&s;t Toleration of evill commended con|nivence at it blameable. <HI>p. 71.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 26. M^r. Saltm.</HI> his dangerous &s;uppo&s;ition of equality of num|ber and power, with diver&s;itie of Religion; of incorporating of two powers; and what may be expected, &s;hould the Sectaries prevail. <HI>p. 74.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 27.</HI> The Authority of the Parliament not pleaded by the Pre&s;|byterians as a &s;upplement of Scriptures. as <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> &s;ugge&s;teth, nor &s;lighted by them as by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> it is; of the pretended danger of the Magi&s;trates engagement with the Mini&s;ters; of the pretended tenderne&s;&s;e of con&s;ciences in Sectaries. <HI>p. 77.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 28.</HI> What a Trumpeter <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> is; his reproach of the Parliament plaine enough, though rather implied then expre&s;&s;ed; a challenge of him to prove his in&s;inuated &s;ugge&s;tions of Trea&s;on, Bla|&s;phemy, &amp;c. in my <HI>Examination</HI> of his New Quere. <HI>p. 82.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 29.</HI> The charge of mi&s; application of <HI>Revel. 18.1.</HI> ju&s;ti&s;ied again&s;t <HI>M^r. Saltm</HI> his deniall. The expectation of new lights which &s;ome Sectaries teach, Papi&s;ticall, fallacious, and dangerous. <HI>p. 85.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
<P>The <HI>Po&s;t&s;cript</HI> in an&s;wer to <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his <HI>Po&s;t&s;cript,</HI> con&s;i&s;ting of two te&s;timonies of <HI>Claudius Salma&s;ius,</HI> the one again&s;t the forme of Bapti&s;me <HI>In the Name of the Father, Sonne, and Holy Gho&s;t;</HI> the other for Independencie of Churches, <HI>p. 91.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="errata">
<HEAD>Errata.</HEAD>
<P>PAg. 41. lin. 4. from the end, after the word <HI>ob&s;erved,</HI> read <HI>by many.</HI> p. 51. l. 8. for <HI>experience</HI> r. <HI>experiments,</HI> p. 84. l. 8. put out the Comma betwixt <HI>Phila&s;trius</HI> &amp; <HI>Brixien&s;is,</HI> p. 87. marg. l. 19. for <HI>Thelmes</HI> r. <HI>The lives</HI> and Text l. 8. from the end for <HI>prophecie</HI> r. <HI>prophecied.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="table of contents">
<PB REF="7">
<HEAD>The Contents of the <HI>Novello-mastix.</HI></HEAD>
<LIST>
<ITEM><HI>Section 1.</HI> THe <HI>Pa&s;&s;ager</HI> his ridiculous de&s;cant upon <HI>M^r. Leys</HI> Name, as if it had &s;ome alliance with French or Spani&s;h lees, to which is oppo&s;ed a Greeke Anagram, and Epigram on his Name, made by a learned Divine about an yeere and halfe &s;ince. <HI>p. 3.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 2.</HI> His confu&s;ed jumbling of heterogeneall and incongruous metaphors, again&s;t rea&s;on and common &s;ence, with the number of his Queries. <HI>p. 5.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 3.</HI> An An&s;wer to his fir&s;t, &s;econd, and third Queries, con|cerning Lieutenant Generall <HI>Cromwell,</HI> and Independency. <HI>p. 7.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 4.</HI> The fourth Quere, a &s;en&s;le&s;&s;e complaint of Jedition, and a &s;landerous imputation of reproach of the Army, an&s;wered: The fifth Query of imputation of calumny and flattery of Lieutenant Generall <HI>Cromwell</HI> convicted of ab&s;urdity, &s;lander, and &s;elfe-con|tradiction. <HI>p. 9.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 5.</HI> The &s;ixth Quere of the imputed breach of priviledge of Parliament, in &s;aying that &s;ome of them favour the way of Indepen|dencie, and the like charge of the A&s;&s;embly an&s;wered. <HI>p. 11.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 6.</HI> His &s;eventh Querie, Whether <HI>M^r. Ley</HI> ought not to be que&s;tioned, for medling with this worthy and authenticke Author, becau&s;e the Clerke of the Honourable Hou&s;e of Commons his De|putie &s;igned his <HI>Pa&s;&s;ages</HI> for the Pre&s;&s;e. <HI>p. 14.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 7</HI> A cleare and full refutation of a &s;lander of his written Copy, (which was not printed) wherein the Writer ab&s;urdly &s;ugge|&s;teth, that <HI>M^r. Leys</HI> Booke &s;ticketh upon the Printers hand to his lo&s;&s;e, the &s;ame day when as he &s;aith it was fir&s;t publi&s;hed. <HI>p. 18.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Sect. 8.</HI> Some Anti-queries returned to this querulous Pam|phleter by another hand. <HI>p. 20.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="letter">
<PB REF="7">
<HEAD>To M^r^. <HI>Iohn Saltmar&s;h,</HI> late Pa&s;tor of <HI>Bra&s;ted</HI> in Kent, <HI>Iohn Ley</HI> wi&s;heth &s;uch <HI>&s;oundne&s;&s;e in judgement, and &s;inceritie in affection, that he may truly, and cordially &s;alute him as a Brother and a friend:</HI> And Sheweth in this Epi&s;tle his unfitne&s;&s;e to un|dertake the di&s;cu&s;&s;ion of a Controver&s;ie, or to be taken for an Antagoni&s;t in any Que&s;tion of the Doctrine of Religion, or of the Di&s;ci|pline or Government of the Church.</HEAD>
<OPENER><SALUTE>SIR,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_YOu have taken upon you in the Title page of your la&s;t booke to make <HI>a full An&s;wer</HI> to mine, but the fulne&s;&s;e you &s;peake of is but the tympanie of a promi&s;e, for your performance is &s;o empty of reall &s;atisfa|ction to intelligent Readers, that &s;ome of them (who have impartially peru&s;ed our papers on both &s;ides) have &s;eriou&s;ly advi&s;ed me not to take &s;uch notice of it, as to vouch&s;afe an An&s;wer unto it; and the rather, becau&s;e you your &s;elfe make &s;uch di&s;tinction betwixt a <HI>refutation</HI> and an <HI>an&s;wer,</HI> that, though you ex|pre&s;ly
<PB REF="8">profe&s;&s;e the one,<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">I will not &s;ay I have made here a Refutation of yours, <HI>(that is, of your Booke) Smoke. p. 51.</HI></NOTE> <HI>you will not &s;ay</HI> you have made good the other.</P>
<P>And for mine owne part, I will deale clearely with you, and let you know my mind, not onely for the pre&s;ent, but for the future; and it is this. <HI>For the pre&s;ent,</HI></P>
<P>I doe not take you to be &s;uch an adver&s;ary as may di&s;cou|rage a man, though but of meane parts, (if not with all of too pu&s;illanimous a &s;pirit) to be your Antagoni&s;t; &s;ince you lay your &s;elfe open to &s;o much di&s;advantage, as may rather in|vite him to begin with you, then di&s;hearten him to hold on when you provoke him to proceed.</P>
<P>But yet (be&s;ides the di&s;&s;wa&s;ions of my judicious friends, who thinke I may right my &s;elfe as much by a &s;ilent neglect of you as by a loud conque&s;t over you) I will give my re&s;olu|tion and my rea&s;ons.</P>
<P>And <HI>for hereafter</HI> my <HI>re&s;olution</HI> is not to mi&s;imploy precious time, (whereof my many ingagements in publique &s;ervice may make me more par&s;imonious then other men) in a reciprocation of a controver&s;ie with you; and my <HI>rea|&s;ons</HI> are the&s;e.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, becau&s;e I &s;ee your genius is rather <HI>Rhetoricall,</HI> or <HI>Po&euml;ticall,</HI> then <HI>Polemicall;</HI> and will not keepe clo&s;e to a que&s;tion to bring it to an i&s;&s;ue; and &s;o you &s;catter your con|ceptions like drops of quick&s;ilver out of the quill; or like beads broke loo&s;e from the &s;tring, &s;o that it is matter of dif|ficulty, and &s;ometimes rather of impo&s;sibility, to gather them into an argument, &s;ince they have more in them of the complexion and trappings of Phra&s;iologie, then of the con&s;ti|tution of &s;ound Divinity; which makes me (be&s;ides that I had rather contend with an Antichri&s;tian Adver&s;ary then with a Chri&s;tian Brother) more willing to take the confu|tation of the mo&s;t learned part of <HI>Bellarmine</HI> for my taske, then to wait upon your wandring and new &s;prung notions, though now and then you pre&s;ent your Reader with a Prim|ro&s;e
<PB REF="8">of pretty expre&s;sion to make him to mi&s;take the &s;ent of a weed for a flower, of an old error under the name and no|tion of a new truth.</P>
<P>Secondly,<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">For your Lo|gicall mar&s;hal|ling, &amp;c. <HI>Smoke p. 16.</HI></NOTE> you profe&s;&s;e your &s;elfe to have no good liking of Logick, <HI>formes of art, and methods of rea&s;on;</HI> and<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Pag. 60.</NOTE> <HI>renounce prudence and con&s;equences as the great engines of will-wor&s;hip;</HI> and if you be of that mind you are fitter to write <HI>Poems,</HI> or <HI>E&s;&s;ayes,</HI> or <HI>Characters,</HI> then to maintaine a <HI>Di&s;pute</HI> in matter of Religion.</P>
<P>Thirdly, I conceive you are the le&s;&s;e fit for that purpo&s;e becau&s;e you &s;eeme to me by that I have read in your writings to be a kind of Vbiquitary in beliefe, or (if I may not call it beliefe, being &s;o uncertaine as you are) I mu&s;t &s;ay you ramble about in your &s;peculation of opinions, but (as re&s;olved upon none of them) &s;ettle no where; &s;o that your Adver&s;ary knowes not where to find you. One while me thinkes you are a <HI>Presbyterian,</HI> becau&s;e you dedicate a Booke to tho&s;e that for the mo&s;t part are &s;uch, as <HI>to a mo&s;t &s;acred and reve|rend A&s;&s;embly;</HI> another while you<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Smoke in the Temple. p. 65. 68.</NOTE> reproach the <HI>Presby|terie,</HI> and gloriou&s;ly &s;et forth the Church way of <HI>Indepen|dents,</HI> and<NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">In your E|pi&s;tle to me, pab. the begin|ning.</NOTE> bring in your &s;elfe as one of them: &s;ometimes I take you for an <HI>Anabapti&s;t,</HI> at lea&s;t for an <HI>Antipaedo bapti&s;t,</HI> for in your exceptions again&s;t Presryterie (and I mu&s;t take your Tenet to be rather again&s;t, then among the Presbyteriall po&s;itions) you<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">Smoke in the Temple. p. 9.</NOTE> &s;ay, <HI>That Bapti&s;me is not to be received by generation now, as Circumci&s;ion was, but by regeneration, or vi&s;ible profe&s;&s;ion as at fir&s;t; nor are the carnall &s;eed now any more the children of</HI> Abraham, <HI>but the faithfull, and that no Ordinance is now to be admini&s;tred upon legall con&s;equences, but on Go&s;pel precepts:</HI> and of Ma&s;ter <HI>Tombes</HI> his booke (in an&s;wer to my objection concerning the delay of Bapti&s;me by Chri&s;ts example) you &s;ay thus,<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Ibid. in your an&s;wer to me. p. 37.</NOTE> <HI>I cannot di&s;pute that here now,</HI> Ma&s;ter <HI>Tombs</HI> will <HI>&s;at is fie you
<PB REF="9">at large in his learned Examen, where he hath made worke for an whole A&s;&s;embly;</HI> wherein (to give you a word by the way) you are much mi&s;taken, both in the man, and in the matter; and you will &s;ee cau&s;e (within a while) to conceive otherwi&s;e of both, then now you doe; and that there lieth no obligation either of nece&s;sitie or of conveni|encie upon the A&s;&s;embly which may engage them to the ex|amination of his <HI>Examen.</HI> Nor is Ma&s;ter <HI>T.</HI> with his mo&s;t compleat armour &s;o formidable a champion, as that there &s;hould need an army of Divines to be mu&s;tered again&s;t him, there be divers <HI>Davids</HI> who are ready for &s;ingle encounter with that braving <HI>Goliah,</HI> and &s;ome have given his cau&s;e &s;uch a wound already, as (though he may play the Mounte|banke with it and skin it over) will never be cured at the bottome.</P>
<P>But this onely <HI>obiter,</HI> pa&s;sing by him, and his booke, (as a parenthe&s;is or parergon to that which is before me at the pre&s;ent) I mu&s;t follow you a little further, and &s;ee whether (tracing the &s;teps of your opinions by the print of your pen) I can overtake you, and at la&s;t find you in any place, or po|&s;ture of con&s;i&s;tence, or &s;ettlement.</P>
<P>In your <HI>Di&s;covery of Independencie</HI> you deliver down-right Anabapti&s;me in many particulars, (without any word of exception or caution to your Reader) as that<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">Smoke p. 10, 11.</NOTE></P>
<P><NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">Smoke p. 10, 11.</NOTE>Tho&s;e <HI>who were baptized under Prelacy were baptized by an Antichri&s;tian power, and that they are no right baptized members of Churches.</HI></P>
<P>That <HI>all con&s;equences drawne from circumci&s;ion, are of no more force, then from the Cloud, and the Sea, and the Rock, and</HI> Noahs <HI>Arke, and other typi|call and figurative places in the Word,</HI> (yet by your leave from &s;ome of the&s;e there may be a good con&s;equence to ba|pti&s;me of infants) <HI>nor can any legall, or probable Scri|ptures make any law or rule for any &s;uch Go&s;pel ad|mini&s;tration,
<PB REF="9">which is not directly in Scripture words to be found.</HI></P>
<P><HI>That childrens Bapti&s;me in the Church is a way never to have a Church of &s;uch baptized beleevers, as in the Apo&s;tles times.</HI></P>
<P><HI>That Bapti&s;me, being a vi&s;ible &s;igne, cannot ra|tionally be admini&s;tred upon one that can neither &s;ee, nor di&s;cerne what is done, to whom the water can be no &s;igne, but they are onely told of it when they come to age. Bapti&s;me is as a fla&s;h of lightning, (as was well ob&s;erved by one) Circumci&s;ion was as a fixed &s;tarre, &s;o much difference in the&s;e two rites.</HI></P>
<P><HI>In&s;titution of Bapti&s;me is to duty as well as grace, which children cannot performe, and &s;o an&s;wer the &s;igne.</HI></P>
<P><HI>In&s;titution of Bapti&s;me is doctrinal in the very act of it, as is acknowledged by all of the pre&s;ent Bapti&s;me,</HI> Matth. <HI>28. now this implyes a capable and teachable &s;ubject.</HI> You have other po&s;itions &s;ymbolizing with the &s;ect of Anabapti&s;ts, but I note onely tho&s;e, which have neere&s;t congruitie to the title of that Sect.</P>
<P>While &s;uch opinions as the&s;e, which you &s;eeme rather to confirme then to confute, incline me to take you for an Ana|bapti&s;t, I am induced to doubt whether you be not &s;omewhat el&s;e, &s;omewhat wor&s;e, by &s;uch exceptions as<NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">Smoke in the Temple. p. 13, 14, 15.</NOTE> the&s;e.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, <HI>That Matth. 28.18.</HI> (it &s;hould be ver&s;. <HI>19.</HI>) and <HI>Mark 16, &amp;c. are rather, and farre more probably to be expounded of the Spirits Bapti&s;me, then of Ba|pti&s;me by water.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, <HI>That the Bapti&s;me of Ie&s;us Chri&s;t by wa|ter, was onely in the Name of Ie&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly. <HI>That the forme by which they Baptize</HI> (viz. <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">aptize thee in the Name of the Father, Son, and holy Gho&s;t,) is a forme of mans devi&s;ing, a tra|dition
<PB REF="10">of man, a meere con&s;equence drawne from &s;uppo&s;ition, and probabilitie, and not a forme left by Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>Fourthly, <HI>That to preach in the Name of Ie&s;us Chri&s;t, or to do any thing in the name of Ie&s;us Chri&s;t, is not alwaies in that gro&s;&s;e manner (as it is taken)</HI> viz. <HI>naming Ie&s;us Chri&s;t, or the naming of the Fa|ther, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t over them, but in the power, vertue, efficacie, Mini&s;terie of Ie&s;us Chri&s;t, or the Per&s;ons of the Godhead, the Father, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>Fifthly,<NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Pag. 17.</NOTE> <HI>That none ought to give Bapti&s;me now, becau&s;e none can give the gift of the holy Gho&s;t.</HI></P>
<P>Sixthly,<NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Pag. 18.</NOTE> <HI>That the fulne&s;&s;e of time is not yet come for ordinances, for as there were &s;everall &s;ea&s;ons for giving out of truth before, &s;o now.</HI></P>
<P>The next Title (under which you &s;ort the opinions of the&s;e times into &s;everall profe&s;sions) is of <HI>&s;eeking and &s;eekers,</HI> and there, (be&s;ides other new Doctrines which you deliver) you &s;ay that<NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg">Pag. 17.</NOTE> <HI>all &s;hall in the la&s;t times be in a &s;ecret, invi&s;ible inward and &s;pirituall glory, no more in gro&s;&s;e, carnall, vi&s;ible evidences, &amp; materiall beames of gifts, &amp; miracles, &amp; this is to know Chri&s;t no more after the fle&s;h;</HI> which cannot be the meaning of the Apo|&s;tles words, <HI>2 Cor. 5.16.</HI> (for gifts and miracles continued after the time that he wrote tho&s;e words) but either that he did not conceive of Chri&s;t as of a temporall King, as the Di&s;ciples &s;ometimes did, <HI>Luk. 24.21. Act. 1.6.</HI> and our Saviour him&s;elfe denyed, <HI>Joh. 18.36.</HI> or that his affections to Chri&s;t were not &s;uch as theirs that had conver&s;ed with him in the fle&s;h, and had been taken onely, or chiefly with the comeltne&s;&s;e of his per&s;on, or had the &s;en&s;ible evidence of his miracles, or had a carnall conviction of his re&s;ur|rection, as <HI>Thomas Didymus</HI> had, <HI>Joh. 20.27.</HI> but that he did &s;piritually participate and communicate with him, deri|ving
<PB REF="10">life and vertue from him, as the members from the head, as where he &s;aith, <HI>I live, yet not I, but Chri&s;t li|veth in me, and the life which I now live, I live by the faith of the Sonne of God, who loved me, and gave him&s;elfe for me,</HI> Gal. <HI>2.20.</HI></P>
<P>Another po&s;ition (which you give out among the excep|tions to the way of <HI>Seekers,</HI> which to orthodox Divines is a meere paradox) is,<NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg">Pag. 18.</NOTE> that <HI>there is no &s;uch power for ordinances as is pretended, but beleevers as di&s;ciples may admini&s;ter, and &s;o did the Apo&s;tles and beleevers formerly as they were di&s;ciples.</HI></P>
<P>I looked to have. found the Antinomian Tenets among the re&s;t which you report, but your &s;ilence concerning them in a place whereto their di&s;covery was &s;o &s;ea&s;onable and per|tinent, is thought by &s;ome, who have read over your booke of <HI>Free Grace</HI> before I &s;aw it, that you thought too honoura|bly of that Sect to bring it in there, where you intended to &s;et<NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">Pag. 19.</NOTE> <HI>the &s;trength and weakne&s;&s;e of each opinion be|fore it &s;elfe, that as on the one &s;ide it may glory, &s;o on the other &s;ide it may feare and be humble;</HI> and that booke &s;hews you plainly to be an Antinomian, though you pre|tend to maintaine your Tenets by the con&s;ent and te&s;timonie of many &s;ound Divines, pag. <HI>204.</HI> &amp;c. wherein they &s;ay you deale by them, as other Antinomians have formerly dealt with <HI>Luther,</HI> bringing their words again&s;t their minds as they did his; and I the rather beleeve it, becau&s;e making triall of the &s;inceritie of your allegations, in that Booke by the quotation which came next to my hands, <HI>viz.</HI> that which you cite out of <HI>M^r. Samuel Boltons Booke of the bounds of Chri&s;tian Freedome;</HI> I find you alleadge his<NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg">Pag. 213. of your <HI>Booke of Free-grace,</HI> and the <HI>flowings of Chri&s;ts blood.</HI></NOTE> words with a guilefull re&s;ervation, breaking them off with a &s;ubtle, &amp;c. whereas if you had gone on to tho&s;e that follow next, you would have &s;hewed the Reader a flat con|tradiction to the Cardinall Tenet of the Antinomians,
<PB REF="11">(which gives them their name) in the&s;e words,<NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg">Pag. 74. of Mr. <HI>Boltons</HI> booke.</NOTE> <HI>acknow|ledge the morall Law as a rule of obedience, and Chri&s;tian walking, and there will be no falling out, whether you take it as promulgated by</HI> Mo&s;es, <HI>or han|ded to you &amp; renued by Chri&s;t;</HI> is not this &s;uch a piece of &s;ophi&s;try in proofe as a<NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg"><HI>Quirinus Cnoglerue</HI> in a little booke in 12. (but &s;pi|der-like full of poy&s;on) called <HI>Symbol. in Sym|bol. Calvinian.</HI></NOTE> malicious Papi&s;t u&s;ed again&s;t <HI>Cal|vin,</HI> when he brought him in, &s;aying, <HI>I would the names of the Trinitie, Per&s;on, homoou&s;ios, &amp;c.</HI> were buryed, but left out the&s;e words; <HI>So that the truth of tho&s;e Ar|ticles of the Chri&s;tian Creed were received and im|braced by all;</HI> we &s;ay the Papi&s;t in this corrupt and maim|ed allegation followed the devill in his quotation of the <HI>91</HI> P&s;alme again&s;t our Saviour, <HI>Matth. 4.6.</HI> where he bringeth in a Text of divine Providence, <HI>He &s;hall give his Angels charge over thee, and in their hands they &s;hall beare thee up, left at any time thou da&s;h thy foot again&s;t a &s;tone, ver&s;. 11, 12.</HI> but leaveth out the limitation, they &s;hall <HI>keepe thee in all thy wayes.</HI></P>
<P>In this example I have done you a favour to compare you to a Papi&s;t, and the Papi&s;t iu&s;tice in matching him with the devill, who&s;e proper &s;inne (as a devill) is<NOTE N="&s;" PLACE="marg">2 Tim. 2.</NOTE> &s;lander.</P>
<P>And I would take you for an Antinomian (as many doe) but that in the &s;ame booke whence they have learned to &s;u&s;|pect you for one of that Sect, I finde &s;omewhat which &s;hews you are not &s;etled in their way, and it is your equall and in|different dealing in part betwixt the Antinomians and their oppo&s;ites in the&s;e words;<NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg">Occa&s;ionall word <HI>prefixed before the</HI> flowings of Chri&s;ts blood. <HI>pag. 1, 2.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Some hearing the Do|ctrine of Free-grace, thinke pre&s;ently there will fol|low nothing but loo&s;ene&s;&s;e, and libertini&s;me, and o|thers hearing of holine&s;&s;e of duties and obedience, thinke there will follow nothing but legalne&s;&s;e, bon|dage, and &s;elfe-righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e; upon the&s;e jealou|&s;ies one &s;u&s;pecting the others doctrine, bends a|gain&s;t another in expre&s;&s;ions &s;omething too uncome|ly
<PB REF="11">for both; and there are &s;ome unwarrantable noti|ons to be found on all &s;ides:</HI> and yet after a little impar|tiall equipoy&s;e betwixt both parties, and their opinions, you &s;way all that followeth &s;o for Free-grace, as to ca&s;t di&s;grace upon the Law; for you &s;ay,<NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg">Ibid. pag. <HI>56.</HI></NOTE> <HI>If Chri&s;t had been more in the Divinitie of the&s;e times, in their preachings for Reformation, and</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>le&s;&s;e, we had had not onely more of his grace, but more of his glory then we &s;ee.</HI></P>
<P>Whereas indeed <HI>by filling out of this new wine too freely,</HI> (to u&s;e your<NOTE N="x" PLACE="marg">Ibid. pag. <HI>9.</HI></NOTE> phra&s;e) many have play'd the loo&s;e and wicked wantons, and have &s;inned the more <HI>that grace might abound,</HI> Rom. <HI>6.1.</HI> becau&s;e they thought them&s;elves not bound to the Law as to a rule of life.</P>
<P>All this while having endeavoured to di&s;cover of what Religion you are, I cannot yet finde that you have made choice of any.</P>
<P>You would have me take it for a part of your prai&s;e that you<NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke</HI> in the Temple p. 11. of your an&s;wer to me as it is in the &s;econd edi|tion.</NOTE> <HI>were not ha&s;ty to beleeve;</HI> but is there not a faulty &s;lowne&s;&s;e of faith, which our Saviour reproveth in &s;ome, calling them<NOTE N="y" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke</HI> in the Temple p. 11. of your an&s;wer to me as it is in the &s;econd edi|tion.</NOTE> <HI>fooles</HI> for not being forward enough to beleeve, <HI>Luk. 24.25.</HI> but you take it perhaps for a point of prudence, to keepe your &s;elfe unengaged untill you &s;ee what varietie the<NOTE N="z" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke</HI> pag. 7. and of your An&s;wer to me, pag. 47. 63.</NOTE> <HI>toleration</HI> you &s;tand for (if it be ob|tained, as I hope it never will be) will bring forth; and you tell us that yet<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke,</HI> pag. 3. &sect;. 11.</NOTE> <HI>we are but in our comings out of Baby|lon, and the fall of Babylon not yet, the &s;moke yet in the Temple, the Angels but yet pouring out their vi|als, the Angels that enlighten the earth not yet flying through the heavens:</HI> and yet towards the later end of your<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Pag. 66.</NOTE> booke you &s;ay, <HI>Now the &s;pirituall di&s;pen&s;ation being come, even the Go&s;pel of Je&s;us Chri&s;t, there is a ful|ne&s;&s;e of &s;pirit let out upon the Saints and people of God, which gathers them up more clo&s;ely, &s;piritually,
<PB REF="12">and cordially then the power of any former di&s;pen&s;a|tions could doe.</HI></P>
<P>In the pro&s;ecution of this third rea&s;on of my refu&s;all to take you for an Antagoni&s;t hereafter, if I have been too co|pious, it is becau&s;e you have been too various and diffu&s;ive in your fancies for matters of religion, &s;o that I &s;incerely pro|fe&s;&s;e I know not where to finde any certaine fixing of your faith, nor in what predicament of profe&s;sion to place you, whether directly or reductively. And I thinke it my part rather to pray for you that God would e&s;tabli&s;h you in his truth, then to trace you through the multiplicitie of opinions di&s;per&s;ed in your papers, e&s;pecially when they are not more untrue in them&s;elves, then uncertaine to your Reader whe|ther they be yours or no.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> If I could tell of what minde you are now, I &s;hould have little incouragement to &s;et upon the confutation of your pre&s;ent errours; becau&s;e you are a man &s;o un&s;table, that I may probably &s;u&s;pect a prevention of my paines, or di&s;appointment of my purpo&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> your c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">nviction there|in, by your voluntary departure from your precedent opini|ons, (before it could reach you) upon a pretence of new light, and further enlargement of Go&s;pel-grace. That this is no &s;lander of you, nor &s;ini&s;ter &s;urmi&s;e, will appeare by your <HI>Smoke in the Temple,</HI> for having alleadged &s;ome pa&s;&s;a|ges of your Booke of <HI>Policie</HI> again&s;t your opinion profe&s;&s;ed in your New Quere, you an&s;wer me thus;<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Smoke in the Temple, p. 13.</NOTE> <HI>For &s;ome things in my Booke of Policie I looke on them as a part of the darkne&s;&s;e I was in, and I can freely joyne with any in cen&s;uring my unregenerate part in me, as I e&s;teeme much of my carnall rea&s;on to be.</HI></P>
<P>And upon another quotation of mine out of the &s;ame Booke, you reply againe,<NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Ibid. pag. 45.</NOTE> <HI>I told you before I dare not allow my &s;elfe the priviledge of an Aphori&s;me of light
<PB REF="12">then, when it was rather night then day with me;</HI> and a third time urging you with your own words out of the &s;ame booke, you an&s;wer me againe;<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">Ibid. pag. 59.</NOTE> <HI>I told you my Politicks were written by my dimmer light;</HI> and yet let me tell you Sir (and I beleeve all judicious Readers of your Dictates will be of my minde) that booke was the be&s;t that ever you wrote, and therefore the be&s;t becau&s;e free&s;t from errour, and free&s;t from errour, becau&s;e it &s;etteth down the <HI>practice of Policie in a Chri&s;tian life, taught from the Scriptures,</HI> as you expre&s;&s;e it in your Title Page, and con&s;i&s;teth of apho|ri&s;mes, grounded upon a Text of Gods word, for the mo&s;t part pertinently and truly applyed.</P>
<P>A fifth Rea&s;on why I &s;hall but this once, not hereafter take you to taske in a word warre, is this; I perceive you glory in the quicke di&s;patch of your worke, that is, to mine under&s;tanding, in be&s;towing little &s;tudy and taking little paines for what you publi&s;h, or, (as the Proverbe hath it) <HI>in making more ha&s;te then good &s;peed.</HI> For in your Letter to me you &s;ay thus;<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Smoke, p. 2.</NOTE> <HI>You &s;ee my labours, deducting the time of their printing, are of about two weekes growth, younger by &s;ome &s;ixe weekes if I mi&s;take not then yours;</HI> where you meane not I &s;uppo&s;e that I was &s;ixe weekes in an&s;wering a &s;heet of paper of yours, and that you an&s;wered fifteene &s;heets of mine in two weekes; for you know not what private time I tooke for it out of publique employment; but comparing the publication of my booke from the Pre&s;&s;e about the tenth of December, and of yours about the &s;ixteenth of Ianuary following, the computation you make in that re&s;pect is not much mi&s;taken: But why Sir &s;hould you confine your &s;elfe to two weekes time, when it was in your power to have allowed your &s;elfe more? and it &s;hould have been a part of your prudence not to have tuckt your &s;elfe up to &s;o little, e&s;pecially if you conceive, (as you &s;ay in
<PB REF="13">your Letter to me,) <HI>I have much advantage of learning and experience;</HI> Sure if you thought &s;o indeed, you would be more wi&s;e then to give me &s;o much advantage by your over-ha&s;ty, and unconcocted effu&s;ions, as you have done; Nor is this the fir&s;t time of your precipitation and boa&s;ting in this kinde, for in the yeere <HI>1643.</HI> you &s;et forth an <HI>Exa|mination of M^r. Fullers Fa&s;t Sermon,</HI> (preached at the Savoy, <HI>Iuly 26.</HI> and afterward printed), and you dedicated your Booke to tho&s;e Divines (under the Title of <HI>The mo&s;t Sacred and Reverend A&s;&s;embly for Reformation of the Church convened by Parliament</HI>) whom now you mention with a <HI>meio&s;is</HI> of e&s;timation, as if all of them together were but a companie of &s;uch de&s;picable dwarfes, that <HI>M^r. T.</HI> the confident Antipaedobapti&s;t might defie them, as <HI>Goliah</HI> did all the armie of I&s;rael; and in the fir&s;t lines of your Epi&s;tle Dedicatorie to them, you &s;ay <HI>you have but the thoughts of an afternoone to &s;pread before them, and that you examined in the &s;ame pace you read.</HI> Now truly Sir, if this be true, I cannot commend your di&s;|cretion in &s;uch expedition; I know you will not plead for your warrant the words of our Saviour to <HI>Judas, Joh. 13.27.</HI></P>
<P>You pretend as the motive to &s;uch ha&s;ty motion, that your intent was, if it <HI>were po&s;&s;ible, truth might overtake an errour before it went too farre, and you hope for par|don if your zeale to the truth made you &s;ee anothers faults &s;ooner then your owne;</HI> but you &s;hould have con|&s;idered, that your adver&s;ary was a man of eminent parts, much more advi&s;ed in what he publi&s;hed in the Pulpit, and by the Pre&s;&s;e, then your &s;elfe; and that following him in &s;uch po&s;t-ha&s;t, before you had well weighed what you wrote again&s;t him, it was not like to fall out, that (at long running) truth &s;hould overtake errour, but rather that many errours on your part &s;hould overtake &s;ome errours on his; and that
<PB REF="13">the <HI>zeale which made you &s;ee anothers faults &s;ooner then your own</HI> was too like that of the hypocrite, <HI>Mat. 7. ver&s;. 3, 4, 5.</HI> and not to be thought more capable of pardon then of reproofe; for the truth had no &s;tead of, nor was it like to have any aid by &s;uch an extemporary undertaking of a cau&s;e of &s;o great moment as the reformation of the Church.</P>
<P>And if your Adver&s;ary had beene &s;o contemptible (as he was not) that nothing could be too &s;light for him which came from you, the A&s;&s;embly of Divines, to whom you de|dicated your printed paper, &s;hould have beene more vene|rable with you, then that you dur&s;t offer &s;uch &s;udden con|ceptions to their peru&s;all and acceptance by way of dedica|tion, unle&s;&s;e you conceived that their a&s;pect and protection could help and heale what was weake and &s;icke in your over|ha&s;ty birth; and I confe&s;&s;e you &s;eeme (but whether I &s;hould take it for Poetry or flattery, I cannot tell) to attribute &s;o much unto them, in your Epi&s;tle; where you &s;ay, <HI>That ayring your a&s;&s;ertions under their Patronages will heale them; for &s;o they brought forth the &s;ick into the &s;treets, that at lea&s;t the &s;hadow of <HI>Peter</HI> might touch &s;ome of them.</HI> But this perhaps you will &s;ay <HI>was written by your dimmer light, when it was rather night then day with you,</HI> (as before I have noted) and I beleeve it was, for your whether imaginarie or adulatorie ellu&s;ion is a &s;traine of elevation of them, both above their merit, and acknowledgement.</P>
<P>But that which at the pre&s;ent I mu&s;t pre&s;&s;e a little fur|ther upon you, is the coercion of your Pen, that you put it not upon &s;uch &s;peed as if it were yet as a quill in the wing. I &s;uppo&s;e being a Poet you have read, and not forgot that of <HI>Horace</HI> concerning <HI>Luci|lius,</HI><NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">&mdash;In h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">ra &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">pe due<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">tor &V;t magnum ver&s;ut dictabat &s;tans pede in une. Cum flueret lutulent<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> qu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">d collere velles. <HI>Her. Serm. l. 1. p. 212,</HI></NOTE> powring <HI>out two hundred ver&s;es in an houre and &s;tanding on one foot;</HI> in which
<PB REF="14">though &s;omewhat were worth no|ting, yet his &s;treame runne muddily. And he commends tho&s;e ver&s;es mo&s;t which have beene made with<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">&mdash; in ver&s;u facieudo Saepe caput &s;caberet, vivos &amp; roderet ungues. <HI>Hor. Ibid. p. 237.</HI></NOTE> often <HI>&s;cratching of the head and biting of the nayles to the quick;</HI> and di&s;commends &s;uch as <HI>have not ta|ken up</HI><NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">&mdash; carmen reprehendite quod non Multa dies, &amp; multa litura cocrcuit, atque Perfectum decies non ca&s;tigavit ad unguem. <HI>Hor. de Arte Poet. p. 369.</HI></NOTE> <HI>many dayes, nor come under many blots, even to a ten|fold correction;</HI> this in re&s;pect of number, and for time he would have<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">&mdash; &s;i quid tamen olim Scrip&s;eris, in Metii de&s;cendat judicis aures, Et patris, &amp; no&s;tras, nonumque prematur in annum. <HI>Hor. Ibid. p. 373. 374.</HI></NOTE> many dictates kept under the file even to the ninth year, which <HI>Quin|tilian</HI> the famous Rhetorician (whom<NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Hic &s;ere omnes Latinos &s;criptores repreheudit, uni <HI>Quintiliano</HI> a&s;&s;urrexit. <HI>Bucolzer Index Chronol. ad an. 1465. p. 420.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Laurentius Valla</HI> who carped at almo&s;t all Latine Writers, did &s;ingularly reverence) did &s;o much approve of, that he kept his books in his private &s;tudy long; that (as he gives the rea&s;on for it)<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">&V;&s;us Horatii con&s;ilio qui in Arte Poetica &s;ua|det ne praecipitetur editio nonum&abque; prematur in annum, dabo iis otium ut refrigerato inventionis amore diligentius repetitos tanquam Lector per|penderem. Sic Quintil. in Epi&s;t. Tryphoni Bibli|opola. praefix, In&s;tit. Orat.</NOTE> the <HI>affection which naturally men beare to their owne invention may be cooled, and that a man may come to review of his owne writings with the indiffe|rencie of an ordinary Reader.</HI></P>
<P>It may be for the di&s;patch you make, and make your boa&s;t of, you expect the prai&s;e of pregnancie of wit, as<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">Thebis hebetes &amp; brutos na&s;ci relatum e&s;t, A|thenis &s;cribendi dicendique acuti&s;&s;imos, ubi penes colitam pueri men&s;e citius eloquuntur praecoce lin|gua. <HI>Tertul. deanima. Tom. 2. Edit. Rhenan. p. 331.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Tertullian</HI> commends &s;ome <HI>Athenian</HI> children for their forwardne&s;&s;e to &s;peake at a moneth old, and as<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg"><HI>Septennes pueri concionantur in ordine Fran|ci&s;ci.</HI> Phil. Bo&s;q. quarta Naufrag. Tabula. in ord. Franci&s;ci in Dominic. pt. Penteco&s;t. p. 241.</NOTE> <HI>Philip Bo&s;quier</HI>
<PB REF="14">doth his <HI>Franci&s;can</HI> Brenthren of whom he &s;aith, <HI>That boyes at &s;even yeeres of age preach in the Order of Francis,</HI> or (which is commendation enough for any mans beliefe) as<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">Sixt. Senen&s;. Biblioth. Sanct. l. 4. p. 220. col. 2.</NOTE> <HI>Sixtus Senen&s;is</HI> reporteth to the prai&s;e of <HI>Co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">|nelius Mu&s;&s;e,</HI> that at twelve yeeres old he was an eloquent Preacher. And for tho&s;e rude times that might de&s;erve prai&s;e which in this knowing and learned Age may need pardon, e&s;pecially if without need any man will obtrude that upon a rationall Reader which hath more affinitie with the nimblene&s;&s;e of conceit, then with the &s;oliditie of judgement; and how &s;oever &s;udden &s;parkes and fla&s;hes of fancie may take with the vulgar, they will not hold reputation with the wi&s;e, but rather &s;tirre up indignation and di&s;daine. And if I &s;hould &s;ay that your <HI>An&s;wer</HI> to me hath had no better ac|ceptance with &s;ome very judicious and godly Divines, I am able to prove it, how fondly &s;oever your &s;elfe, or your &s;edu|ced followers conceive of your papers. I deny not but &s;ome|times a man may be unexpectedly put upon it, to doe that <HI>extempore,</HI> which he would not willingly undertake but upon deliberation; and I have beene nece&s;sitated on the &s;ud|den to preach even in the Vniver&s;itie, and in other places &s;ome of my Dictates have beene divulged with more di|&s;patch then I wi&s;hed; yet I was alwaies of the mind of <HI>Da|vid</HI> (and know no cau&s;e to be a changeling in it) <HI>who would not offer unto God of that which co&s;t him nought, 2 Sam. 24.</HI> nor would I &s;o farre undervalue the judgement of men, e&s;pecially in this learned age, as to offer any thing to their peru&s;all, which had not come under a threefold cen|&s;ure on this &s;ide the Printing Hou&s;e; the fir&s;t of mine owne &s;erious and rigorous revi&s;all; the &s;econd of &s;ome middle ca|pacitie, that I may know whether it be ob&s;cure or no to an or|dinary Reader; the third of &s;ome judicious Critick, that I
<PB REF="15">might not ju&s;tly come under the rod of an accurate Reader.</P>
<P>And in the choice of Bookes I would be glad to know not onely the Authour, who makes them, but what time and &s;tu|die hath beene imployed upon them; and if they have taken up tenne years time, as did <HI>Perer.</HI> his<NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">His fir&s;t Tome was &s;et forth an. 1589. and his la&s;t an. 1598.</NOTE> Comment. upon <HI>Ge|ne&s;is:</HI> or<NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Adric. Delph. Pra&s;at. in The|atr. Terrae <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> Sanct. <HI>p. 3.</HI></NOTE> Thirty yeers, as <HI>Theatrum Terrae Sanctae</HI> made by <HI>Adrichomius Delphus</HI> as he profe&s;&s;eth in the Preface of his Booke: or<NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Emau. Sa. Aphori&s;m. prae|fat. Lectori. <HI>p. 2.</HI></NOTE> fortie yeers or thereabouts, which <HI>Eman. Sa.</HI> &s;pent upon his <HI>Aphori&s;mes,</HI> I like them &s;o much the better <HI>(caeteris paribus)</HI> as they were done with more ad|vice, &s;tudie, and premeditation.</P>
<P>I will conclude this rea&s;on with a dome&s;ticall &s;tory which may be pertinnently applied to our ca&s;e; A noble man had a controver&s;ie in law with a Brewer, who had a garden and dwelling hou&s;e bordering neere upon his, the Brewer gave a charge to his &s;ervant to put in &s;o many hog&s;heads of wa|ter more into all his brewings then hee had wont to dee, telling him that &s;uch a &s;upply would beare the charge of his &s;uite with his Adver&s;ary; which being overheard by the Nobleman, he &s;ent pre&s;ently to the Brewer, re&s;olving he would not goe any longer to law with him, who upon &s;uch ea&s;ie and cheape termes could manage his part of the &s;uit; I will make bold to apply it (upon confidence that you will doe <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">s you &s;ay,<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Smoke in the Temple in an&s;wer to me. p. 13.</NOTE> <HI>for interpreting any thing from me on the better &s;ide of it,</HI>) while you &s;uffer your fancie to flye abroad &s;o fa&s;t, and have &s;uch a fluid inkpot as ready at hand as the Thames to the Brewer, in &s;uch a cau&s;e to write in a fortnight more then an abler man then your &s;elfe would undertake to doe in a moneth, I &s;hall not thinke it fit to draw out this di&s;&s;ention betwixt us to any further length, nor have I lei&s;ure, or if I had, for the for<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="3 letters"> rea&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">s I
<PB REF="15">&s;hould have no li&s;t to wiredraw a debate or Controver|&s;ie of this kind with you, or any one el&s;e who makes no more of the matter then you doe.</P>
<P>Sixthly, It is needle&s;&s;e for me to be engaged any further in this quarrell; &s;ince,</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, I am a&s;&s;ured by very convincing evidence that your interpo&s;ition for delay in &s;etting up the Church Government (which at fir&s;t I feared would prove a Remora unto it) is not like to give any impediment to the expedition de&s;ired.</P>
<P>Secondly, Others, who thinke I might be better im|ployed in more publique &s;ervice, me willign to take me off this controver&s;ie, and to undertake you them&s;elves, as occa&s;ion &s;hall require.</P>
<P>Now <HI>S^r.</HI> having done with you as an Adver&s;arie, I would clo&s;e with you upon kind and Chri&s;tian termes, if I knew under what notion to take my leave of you, with your good liking; and I am doubtfull what rela|tion to make u&s;e of, &s;ince you &s;ay,<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">In your <HI>De|&s;igne of Recon|cil.</HI> p. 5. nu. 17.</NOTE> <HI>We may be in one Chri&s;t though diver&s;e, and we may bee friends though not Brethren,.</HI> If we be in one Chri&s;t I &s;hould rather &s;ay we are Brethren, though not friends; but if we be friends and in Chri&s;t, we mu&s;t needs be Brethren, &s;onnes of the &s;ame Father, and heires of the &s;ame hope, and inheritance in heaven; although not knowing, or &s;u&s;pecting each others intere&s;t, wee may bee more un|friendly among our &s;elves then we &s;hould be: And though you be le&s;&s;e a Brother then you have been, for (as I heare) you acknowleldged before the Honourable Com|mittee of Examinations that you have renounced your Ordination, the ground of your Mini&s;teriall Brother|hood in the Church of <HI>England,</HI> yet &s;ince you are plea&s;ed
<PB REF="16">to call me both<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">So in the in|&s;cription of your Letter.</NOTE> <HI>Friend</HI> and<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">In your Smoke p. 26.</NOTE> <HI>Brother;</HI> I &s;hall (with much hearty &s;orrow to &s;ee your good parts &s;o ill imploy|ed, as they are, on the wrong &s;ide, and my fervent prayers to the Father of lights to give you light for &s;moke, to guide you into the way of Truth and Peace, and to &s;ettle you in it) &s;incerely &s;ub&s;cribe my &s;elfe</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>Yours in the affections and offices of a friend and Brother JOHN LEY.</SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB N="1" REF="16">
<HEAD><HI>LIGHT FOR SMOKE:</HI> OR, A Cleare and di&s;tinct <HI>Reply</HI> to a darke and confu&s;ed <HI>An&s;wer</HI> of M^r. <HI>Iohn Saltmar&s;h,</HI> &amp;c.</HEAD>
<DIV2 N="1" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. I.</HI> Of the Title <HI>Independent,</HI> in what &s;ence it is di&s;claimed, in what acknoweldged; and of &s;ubordination idenied by <HI>M^r. S.</HI> and pu|ritie in the Church held nece&s;&s;ary by him.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL>Smoke.</LABEL> Pag.<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">In the former edition the an|&s;wer to me be|ginneth a new order of figures, &s;o this quotation is p. 2. but in the &s;econd edition it is p. 12.</NOTE> 12.</P>
<P><HI>_FOr the notion of Independencie you &s;peake of, I dare not owne it, becau&s;e I account my &s;elfe both under a &s;pirituall and civill &s;upremacie, under Je&s;us Chri&s;t and the Magi&s;trate &s;everally, and exempt from neither.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> Your pretended dependencie on the Magi&s;tracie will not ex|empt you from the name or notion of Independencie, (a title di|ver&s;ly entertained by the Anti-Presbyteriall party, while &s;ome own and honour it, &s;ome di&s;claime and abhor it,<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Mien Ex|am. of the New Quere. p. 2.</NOTE> as I have former|ly &s;hewed) for you give the Magi&s;trate &s;o little power in matter of Religion, that<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 62. 63.</NOTE> you would have all left to a libertie of con|&s;cience
<PB N="2" REF="17">&s;cience therein; cnceiving that, as<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">M. <HI>SAltm.</HI> Epi&s;tle to the Beleevers of &s;everall opini|ons. p. 1.</NOTE> <HI>though the wayes be divers to the Citie of</HI> London, <HI>&s;ome travelling from the North, &s;ome from the South, &s;ome from the Ea&s;t, and &s;ome from the We&s;t, yet all come thither, though there may be &s;ome mi&s;taking of the way in each, &s;o is the gathering of the Saints into heaven.</HI> Which if you meane of &s;o many &s;everal Sects of beleevers as in this Booke, and &s;ome other of your Pamphlets you plead for, you meane it of &s;ome who are as farre out of the way to heaven, as if a man at <HI>Lichfield</HI> &s;hould travell not Soth-ward but North-ward to goe to <HI>London,</HI> or as if at <HI>Barwicke</HI> he &s;hould travell not North-ward but South-ward to come to <HI>Edenborough.</HI></P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 12.</LABEL><HI>We dare not be Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, Nationall, the&s;e are no formes of whole&s;ome words, to which we are commended, nor know we any &s;uch power, but that of Brethren, Mini&s;terie, and Fellow&s;hip; and if you call the Churches of Chri&s;t Independent for this, we mu&s;t &s;uffer till the Lord bring forth our righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e as the noone-day.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>The graduall &s;ubordination of A&s;&s;emblies again&s;t the Indepen|dencie of Congregationall meetings is made good by the large and learned Booke of M^r. <HI>Samuel Rutherford,</HI> &s;o that it is need|le&s;&s;e to take up their defence in this place, at lea&s;t with you, who (as I have ob&s;erved your genius) are not fit to be taken for an An|tagoni&s;t in any Polemicall point.</P>
<P>And for that you &s;ay, <HI>they are no formes of whole&s;ome words,</HI> it is no more then the <HI>Arians</HI> &s;aid of the words <HI>Trinitas, E&s;&s;entia, Hemoeu&s;ios,</HI> &amp; <HI>Per&s;ona,</HI> becau&s;e they found them not in the Scri|pture; And if you were not &s;wayed by a &s;pirit of Libertini&s;me, you would thinke them very whol&s;ome words, as &s;ignifying &s;o|veraigne remedies again&s;t the ruptures of Schi&s;me, and uleers or gangrenes of Here&s;ie.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 12.</LABEL><HI>Nor know we any &s;uch power, but that of Brethren, Mini&s;ters and Fellow&s;hip.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="3" REF="17">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> Doe you not know S^r. that that which is Mini&s;terie and &s;ervice in re&s;pect of God, may be rulel and authoritie in re&s;pect of men? are there not Officers in the Church called Elders? and are not tho&s;e Elders Rulers? and tho&s;e Elders and Rulers Fathers? and is there not a &s;pirituall fatherhood and begetting through the Go|&s;pel? 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 4.15. and mu&s;t not the&s;e by the fifth Commande|ment be honoured and obeyed under that Title above the relation of Brotherhood, and Fellow&s;hip? and are there not children in the Church as well as Fathers? and may not the father, as the child gives him cau&s;e, u&s;e both the rod and the &s;pirit of meek|ne&s;&s;e? if not, &s;urely the Apo&s;tle would not have put this Que&s;tion to the <HI>Corinthians, Shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the &s;pirit of meekne&s;&s;e?</HI> ver&s;. 21. of the &s;ame Chapter.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 12.</LABEL><HI>And if you call the Churches of Chri&s;t Independent for this, wee mu&s;t &s;uffer untill the Lord bring forth our righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e as the noon-day.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>If I were worthy to give a Name to the Churches of Chri&s;t, I would call them Dependent, for the mo&s;t of them are &s;ubordinate to Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall and Nationall A&s;&s;emblies; not Indepen|dent, as the fewe&s;t are, and of tho&s;e few &s;ome of them are &s;o un|&s;ound in doctrine that they de&s;erve not the title of Churches to be put upon them; and if you profe&s;&s;e your &s;elfe Independent in that &s;ence you have acknowledged, and for that be &s;o called, I pray you S^r. what &s;uffering doe you complaine of? is it any &s;uffer|ing to you to be called by your Name M^r. <HI>Saltmar&s;h,</HI> which you owne? and foro the <HI>bringing forth of your righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e as the noone day;</HI> I mu&s;t tell you S^r. your <HI>dawnings of light</HI> are come to this noone dayes di&s;covery, that all may &s;ee, (but tho&s;e who&s;e eyes are darkened with your <HI>Smoke</HI>) that the unrighteou&s;ne&s;&s;e of tho&s;e Sectaries, whom you embrace as Independent Brethren, in broken forth as the <HI>&s;moke of the bottomle&s;&s;e pit,</HI> Revel. 9.2. with great danger to corrupt the ayre into an Epidemicall contagion.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="2" TYPE="section">
<PB N="4" REF="18">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. II.</HI> The Objection of un&s;ea&s;onablene&s;&s;e of <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his Quare ju&s;tified, and his gro&s;&s;e mi&s;take or wilfull fal|&s;ification of my words detected.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 14.</LABEL><HI>VVHat better &s;ea&s;on could I come in then &s;uch a one wherein things were but moving and ripening towards e&s;tabli&s;h|ment? where no thing is &s;etled, there nothing can be di&s;turbed &mdash; And whereas you &s;ay the Parliaments determinations were finall, that holds better for me who might have &s;poken to much le&s;&s;e purpo&s;e had I &s;taid till and had beene done, and the determinations ended and become finall; &s;ure it was a time then to &s;peake or never; and by your owne account too, for you are plea&s;ed to reckon up the proceedings of the State in the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e of Religion, which are &s;uch as had I &s;taid I had had a wor&s;e &s;ea&s;on.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In the Title page of my Examination I &s;aid your Quaere was un&s;ea&s;oanble, and gave rea&s;ons thereof, <HI>pag.</HI> 4, 5. and among o|thers I reckoned up foure particulars of the &s;ubordination, and ex|erci&s;e of the Presbyteriall Di&s;cipline, &s;et out already by Authority of Parliament, in re&s;pect whereof your <HI>Quere and determination upon it</HI> came too late; and it might have beene more &s;ea&s;onable either while the matters were in debate of the A&s;&s;embly of Di|vines, or when fir&s;t the votes of the A&s;&s;embly were pre&s;ented to the Parliament; but when both Parliament and A&s;&s;embly, after much debate, were &s;o farre, and &s;o publiquely engaged for the Presbyteriall Government, it was too late for &s;uch a novice as you by &s;o poore and trifling a paper as you put forth to offer to op|po&s;e it; which was not like (being of &s;o little worth) to be of any great weight with the Parliament, (though &s;ome Indepen|dents who will have all their Gee&s;e to be Swans, &s;aid of it, it was <HI>a very rationall peece,</HI> who&s;e fond opinion of it advanced it to the reputation to be thought worthy of a refutation) all the mi&s;chiefe it was like to doe (for no good could rea&s;onably be looked for
<PB N="5" REF="18">from it) was to interpo&s;e betwixt the command of the Magi|&s;trate, and the obedience of the people, and to prepare &s;uch as are &s;illy and perver&s;e to a prejudice, and to make them refractory again&s;t reformation intended; and this is one part of the Indepen|dents good &s;ervice they doe to the civill Authority.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 15.</LABEL><HI>For bayting my Quere with truth and peace, you allude to Chri&s;ts allegory that we are fi&s;hers of men, and if I have no wor&s;e things to bayte with then the&s;e two, truth and peace, none need I hope to be afraid of the hooke.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In the &s;econd Section of my Booke having &s;et downe the Title of your loo&s;e &s;heete, <HI>A new Quere, &amp;c.</HI> I &s;ay thus; <HI>He knew well enough the humour of li&s;tening after newes prevaileth with our people of all &s;orts, and therefore being to fi&s;h in troubled waters he putteth upon his hooke that baite at which it was like many would be nibling.</HI> Where it is plaine as may be, my meaning was that your <HI>bait</HI> was <HI>Novelty,</HI> not <HI>Truth and Peace,</HI> where with I begin a new &s;entence, and &s;peake di&s;tinctly of them afterwards, and there|fore I may well come upon you with your owne Quere, (mi&s;ap|plied to me) <HI>Why deale you not more candidly?</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 16.</NOTE> <HI>why are you not more faithfull in your interpretation to the Originall?</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="3" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. III. Rom. 14.23.</HI> What&s;oever is not of faith is &s;inne, no barre to the e&s;tabli&s;hment of the Pro&s;byteriall Government; <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his di&s;tinction of a State and publique con&s;cience and a per&s;onall con&s;cience.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 17.</LABEL><HI>SInce you will helpe me to prove you are welcome, you have fur|ni&s;hed me with one Argument more, you are a faire enemie to l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">nd out your owne weapon; and n<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">w you have made your Argu|ment
<PB N="6" REF="19">halfe for me I &s;hall make the other halfe my &s;elfe. What the Impo&s;ers of Government cannot doe in faith they &s;inne, this is your halfe Argument, but you take it for granted our Impo&s;ers of Government are not &s;uch, but &s;uch as are fully per&s;waded, and can &s;et up the Government in faith.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">Pag. 9. of mine <HI>Exam.</HI></NOTE>I &s;hewed you &s;hould frame your Argument, according to the &s;cope of your Quere, rather again&s;t the e&s;tabli&s;hment of a government by the Magi&s;trate, then again&s;t &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to a go|vernment by the people; and you &s;eeme to take this as a courte&s;ie from me, but you ill de&s;erve it, for you repeat it &s;o imperfectly as to ob&s;cure the light of it, and to impaire the &s;trength of it; for you bring it in thus: <HI>What the Impo&s;ers of Government cannot doe of faith they &s;inne;</HI> whereas in my Booke, out of which you &s;hould fairely, nd faithfully have tran&s;cribed, the argument hath it more dearcly and fully in the&s;e words: <HI>Tho&s;e that &s;et up a Government whereof they are not fully per&s;waded in their mind, and which they cannot do in faith, do &s;inne.</HI> To this <HI>major</HI> you adde a <HI>minor</HI> and <HI>con|clu&s;ion,</HI> as followeth.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 18.</LABEL><HI>But the Parliament cannot be fully per&s;waded of this govern|ment, therefore if they &s;et it up they &s;inne; and they cannot be fully per&s;waded, becau&s;e the State or publique con&s;cience cannot con&s;ent at this time; and the State con&s;cience cannot con&s;ent, becau&s;e it hath no Scripture to &s;ecure it; for how can the Parliament be &s;aid to be fully per&s;waded, &amp;c. unle&s;&s;e they could fully &s;igne it with a</HI> jus di|vinum, <HI>or divine right? nothing but Scripture and the Word can properly fully per&s;wade.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><HI>Tho&s;e that &s;et up a Government, &amp;c.</HI> This you call my Argu|ment, but it is yours; for I deny your <HI>minor</HI> propo&s;ition, and con|&s;equently your <HI>conclu&s;ion,</HI> wherein you impute &s;inne unto the Parliament, if they &s;et up Presbyteriall Government. And you tell us of a <HI>State or publique con&s;cience,</HI> and of that you &s;ay in the la&s;t page of your book, it is with a publique <HI>or State con&s;cience as
<PB N="7" REF="19">it is with a per&s;onall and particular con&s;cience, what is done mu&s;t be done in faith, or el&s;e there is weakne&s;&s;e, doubting, and &s;inne; now where there is not a full con&s;ent, and per&s;wa&s;ion from the Word of faith, there cannot be faith properly &mdash; if the laws of truth were founded, as the laws of civill States, in a meere legi&s;lative power, then Popery hath had as good a&s;&s;urance as any, they have had mo&s;t voices, mo&s;t councols.</HI> I wonder S^r. how you that &s;o contract the Church into a particular Congregation, and who will not endure to heare of a Church of &s;uch a latitude, as to be called <HI>Nationall,</HI> can allow of &s;uch a large con&s;cience as a <HI>State</HI> and <HI>publique con&s;cience:</HI> and you reduce it to the &s;ame rule that you doe a per&s;onall, and a par|ticular con&s;cience, and of both you &s;ay, <HI>they cannot have a full con&s;ent and per&s;wa&s;ion but from the word of faith;</HI> and doe you meane thereby, that what&s;oever the State alloweth mu&s;t have a particular warrant from the word of God? and that the civill Sanction mu&s;t be &s;et on nothing but that which hath the &s;tampe of a <HI>Jus Divinum</HI> upon it? if &s;o, you &s;o much pinion the civill power, as to make it of little u&s;e for Government, either of Church or State.</P>
<P>Although againe you be as much too loo&s;e (as here you are too nice) in that to the Magi&s;trate you give libertie to different Reli|gions, all pretending to the word of God, though in many points repugnant one to another.</P>
<P>For that of the Apo&s;tle, <HI>what&s;oever is not of faith is &s;inne,</HI> Rom. 14.23. it imports (as &s;ome expound it) that all the workes of In|fidels are &s;innes, that it belongeth al&s;o to beleevers, and boundeth them &s;o in their Chri&s;tian practice, that they mu&s;t doe nothing again&s;t con&s;cience, nothing with a doubting con&s;cience, nothing at all which hath not warrant from the Word either in generall principles, or particular conclu&s;ions; and it &s;erves likewi&s;e to &s;hut out meere humane inventions from the wor&s;hip of God, and the luxuriant fruitfulne&s;&s;e of humane fancie, again&s;t which the An|cient and Orthodoxe<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Tert. deprae|&s;cript. adver&s;. haeret. Hilar. in <HI>P&s;al. 132.</HI> Hieron. contra Helvid. Aug. contra. Petil. <HI>l. 3. c. 6.</HI></NOTE> Doctors have given many cautions, which Prote&s;tant Writers pertinently bring in again&s;t Popi&s;h Traditions, and additions thereto. But makes nothing either again&s;t the States e&s;tabli&s;hing of the Presbyteriall Government, nor again&s;t the peoples yeelding to it for want of faith, &s;ince for a great part
<PB N="8" REF="20">of it, it is grounded on the Word of God, and is in no part of it repugnant to it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="4" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. IIII. M^r. Saltm.</HI> his unequall dealing in di&s;tributing his owne and his adver&s;aries worke: The Pre&s;byterie not like Prelacie in un|warrantablene&s;&s;e by the word of God. Of <HI>Prudence</HI> how for of lawfull u&s;e in Religious matters.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 20.</LABEL><HI>NOw you are to prove more then perhaps you thought on, that is, to cleare a Church Covenant, which many of your way are a|gain&s;t, for though you condemne it in &s;ome Churches, yet a Na|tionall Church-Covenant you plead for.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>By what law would you put me to cleare a Church-covenant? it is no part of my worke in the taske I undertooke, and if you may decline di&s;cu&s;&s;ing the impo&s;ition of Prote&s;tations (as you do in the next precedent paragraph) though mentioned by me as a proofe again&s;t you, and as you doe the objection made from the deferring of our Saviours Bapti&s;me till he was about thirtie yeers of age,<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke.</HI> p. 37.</NOTE> as you doe likewi&s;e in the further pro&s;ecution of your <HI>Reply,</HI> why &s;hould you take upon you to appoint me an imperti|nent worke, and which is more, that which is repugnant to my judgement? for you &s;ay it is to cleare a Church-covenant, which is rather your office then mine, who thinke it fitter to be accu&s;ed then cleared.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 20, 21.</LABEL><HI>You grant that the Government is but in &s;ome parts warrantable by the word of God, &s;o was Epi&s;copacy and Prelacy in &s;ome parts of it, there is not any fal&s;e wor&s;hip or way but it hath &s;ome parts of truth in it, the great image had a head of gold, &amp;c. truth mu&s;t be all one and the &s;ame, and homogencall, not in parts.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="9" REF="20">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> You allow your &s;elfe too much libertie in changing my words, which have their weight and pertinency, from whence if you va|ry, you marre the matter; I &s;aid not the Government is <HI>but in &s;ome parts warrantable</HI> by the word of God, but in the chiefe parts, which you will not &s;ay of Prelacy, for that con&s;i&s;teth in be|ing chiefe, in a&s;&s;uming a Lordly preeminence over their brethren of the Mini&s;tery; but the chiefe parts of the Presbyteriall Go|vernment have their warrant in the word, and why not the re&s;t? Be&s;ides, it is not enough to have &s;ome parts, or the chiefe parts of government warrantable by the word of God, but it mu&s;t be in no part contrary to the word of God; and &s;o we may &s;ay of Pre&s;|bytery, not &s;o of Prelacie. You &s;ay <HI>truth mu&s;t be all one and the &s;ame, homogencall in all parts,</HI> that is, if you &s;peake to the point, all truth mu&s;t be onely Scripture truth; but hath not the light of nature taught the heathens many truths who never &s;aw the Scrip|ture? and is any government reduced to practice without &s;ome prudentiall &s;upplyes, in divers particulars wherein the Scripture is &s;ilent? as for the Elders in a Congregation, how many they &s;hould be, whether perpetuall or annuall, and what their qualifications &s;hould be for the mea&s;ure of knowledge, and other abilities, and whether they &s;hould be maintained at the charge of the Church, and there are many Queries concerning the particulars of the Dea|cons office, which cannot be re&s;olved by any direction of the written word.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 21.</LABEL><HI>Nor are grounds of prudence any Scripture grounds; to rule by prudence hath let in more will-wor&s;hip then any thing; Prelacie had its prudence for every new additionall in wor&s;hip, and government; and if Pre&s;bytery like prudence too, let the Reader iudge what may follow.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>There is prudence which in the habit is an endowment from God, in the exerci&s;e a dutie from man, <HI>Matth.</HI> 10.16. whereby
<PB N="10" REF="21">every ordinance of God is to be ordered to the be&s;t advantage for his honour, and the edification of his people. Oppo&s;ite to this on the one hand is the corrupt and pragmaticall policie of &s;uch, as when they <HI>profe&s;&s;e them&s;elves wi&s;e they become fooles, Rom.</HI> 1.22. and &s;uch are they who pretend to perfect the Church of God by their inventions and traditions; and there is on the other hand a neglect and contempt of prudence, which hath brought a con|temptible confu&s;ion upon the profe&s;&s;ion of Religion, and this is mo&s;t found among the &s;ects mo&s;t oppo&s;ite to Presbytery.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 21.</LABEL><HI>And what is that, not directly from Scripture, yet not repugnant? &s;urely, Chri&s;ts rule is not &s;uch, he oppo&s;es any tradition to the com|mand of God, net directly from Scriptures is repugnant to Scrip|tures, &s;uch is the onene&s;&s;e, intirene&s;&s;e, indivi&s;ibilitie, and e&s;&s;entialitie of the truth; He that is not with me is again&s;t me.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><HI>Not directly from Scripture</HI> (&s;ay you) <HI>is repugnant to Scrip|ture;</HI> if you meane it univer&s;ally, it is fal&s;e, (as the precedent particulars doe evince) if you meane it of the &s;ub&s;tantials of faith and practice, you &s;ay true, but not to the purpo&s;e; of &s;uch as the&s;e is the authoritie of our Saviour, <HI>He that is not with me is again&s;t me,</HI> Matth. 12.30. but of circum&s;tantials it is &s;ound, <HI>he that is not again&s;t me is with me,</HI> Mar. 9.40. And though it be for the honour of the word to be received for a rule of Religion both affirma|tively and negatively, yet to wring it and wre&s;t it to &s;erve all turnes, where God meant to leave men to prudentiall accommo|dation of times, per&s;ons, places, and occa&s;ions, is to abu&s;e and di&s;|honour it, and &s;o doe mo&s;t of tho&s;e who pretend mo&s;t to magnifie the maje&s;tie of the word.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 21.</LABEL><HI>And for the Reformed Churches as a rule, that is to &s;et the Sunne by the Diall, and not the Diall by the Sunne, we mu&s;t &s;et the Chur|ches by the word, and not Church by Church, and the word by the Church.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="11" REF="21">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> The Reformed Churches are not onely as the Diall to the Sun, but as the clocke to the Diall, and the word as the Sunne to both; when the Sunne doth not &s;hine, nor the diall give a &s;hadow, the clocke mu&s;t be heeded for the houre of the day; and &s;ometimes one clocke may be a direction to another: and though one indivi|duall per&s;on or Church hath not power over another, yet many may have power over one, for <HI>the &s;pirit of the Prophets is &s;ubie<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">t to the Prophets,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor</HI> 14.32. and whether they have rule &amp; power over each other or no, one Church may be a patterne to another &s;o farre as the word of God is a patterne to it, as <HI>Paul</HI> &s;aid to the Corinthians, <HI>Be ye followers of me, even as I al&s;o am of Chri&s;t,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11.1. or (where it is &s;ilent) &s;o farre as the light of rea&s;on directeth.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="5" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. V.</HI> Whether Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, and Nationall Pre&s;byteries be like the Independents gathering of Churches.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 23.</LABEL><HI>ANd when people are in&s;tructed, &s;till your worke remaines to prove your Pre&s;bytery over Congregations, or a Church ga|thered out of a Church to be over a Church; which may upon the Pre&s;bytery more in&s;tly be recriminated then where you doe &s;o often recriminate upon gathered Churches; and me thinks to me it is un|rea&s;onable to taxe any for Church-gathering, when your Pre&s;bytery is maintained by &s;uch a kinde of principle; What is your Cla&s;&s;icall, your Provinciall, your Nationall Pre&s;bytery, but a Church gather|ed out of the re&s;t, call it a veronall, or repre&s;entative, or what you plea&s;e?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><HI>Still your worke remaines?</HI> You are &s;till putting worke upon me (as I told you before) which was no part of my underta|king, when I examined your Quere; and as unwilling to performe
<PB N="12" REF="22">your own, for you &s;ay in the next precedent paragraph; <HI>it is not your worke to di&s;pute the Intere&s;t of Elders and people di&s;tinctly,</HI> and yet you have taken upon you a Di&s;cour&s;e of Church order in the opening of M^r. <HI>Prinnes Vindication;</HI> I did not &s;o, nor was it need|full in the thing it &s;elfe, being fully done by others, nor directly in|cident to my An&s;wer to your paper; Nor if I thought it fit to ar|gue and to di&s;cu&s;&s;e that controver&s;ie, would I doe it in a debate with you, for the rea&s;ons fore-alleadged.</P>
<P>And for your recrimination, that Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, and Na|tionall Presbyteries are gatherings of Churches out of Churches, which the Presbyterians condemne in your partie, it is a very im|pertinent and perver&s;e compari&s;on; wherein there are many con|&s;iderable differences, (that make it criminall in your Church, and commendable in Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, and Nationall A&s;&s;emblies) which be&s;ides many other are the&s;e;</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> The&s;e &s;ubordinate gatherings are not made out of any conceipt favouring of &s;ingularitie, di&s;daine, or contempt of en|tire communion with tho&s;e out of whom they are gathered, as in your gatherings of Churches, but out of care and compa&s;&s;ion to them to con&s;ult and provide for their good, as the gathering of the principall Patriots out of the countrey to be united in the Hou&s;e of Commons, is not for making of a Schi&s;me from their countrey, but for meeting in coun&s;ell and care for their countrey.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> This gathering into Cla&s;&s;es, &amp;c. is with con&s;ent and free choice of tho&s;e Societies out of which they are gathered, as it is in the choice of Knights, Citizens and Burge&s;&s;es for the Par|liament: not &s;o in your Church gatherings, for tho&s;e who are left out, when you admit of Members in your &s;elected choice for Church-way, are di&s;plea&s;ed with your neglects of them, and re|fu&s;all to admini&s;ter all the ordinances of God unto them.</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> Tho&s;e who you call out as Members of your new ga|thered Churches, might more conveniently joyne together in the admini&s;tration of holy things, as they are by Gods providence di&s;po&s;ed of in Pari&s;hionall dwellings, then your covenanted mem|bers, who are many times in their habitations as farre di&s;tant as <HI>London</HI> and <HI>Dover,</HI> yea, &s;ometimes as farre as <HI>London</HI> and <HI>Am|&s;terdam, Raterdam, Arnhem,</HI> or <HI>New England:</HI> But the gather|ing
<PB N="13" REF="22">of Pa&s;tours and Elders into Cla&s;&s;icall A&s;&s;emblies, is made with much conveniency, and withall in a kinde of nece&s;&s;itie, be|cau&s;e the Churches whom they repre&s;ent cannot po&s;&s;ibly all of them convene in one place, or if they could, they would be too many to be drawn from their dwellings, too many to be admitted to coun&s;ell and cen&s;ure.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> Gatherings of Mini&s;ters and Elders into Cla&s;&s;es, &amp;c. makes much for pre&s;ervation of truth and peace in Parochiall con|gregations, but your gatherings of Churches are, and have proved the meanes to broach e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">ours, and breed &s;chi&s;mes.</P>
<P><HI>Fifthly,</HI> The gathering of Elders for con&s;ultation and provi&s;ion for the welfare of other particular Churches, as it hath &s;ure ground of religious rea&s;on, &s;o hath it the honour of mo&s;t ancient and ho|nourable pre&s;cription from the<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Bin. Tom. <HI>1.</HI> Concil. pag. <HI>2.</HI> Excu&s;. Pari&s;. <HI>1636.</HI></NOTE> fourteenth yeere after the re&s;ur|rection of Chri&s;t, <HI>Act.</HI> 15. to this day, whereas your gathering of Churches out of Churches in a State, and a time of reformation, is a new device, never practi&s;ed, or approved by the godly in for|mer ages.</P>
<P><HI>Sixthly,</HI> The gathering of Mini&s;ters and Elders into A&s;&s;em|blies Cla&s;&s;icall, &amp;c. is authorized by the Parliament, the &s;upreame Iudicatory of the Kingdome, whereas your Church gathering is not allowed by authoritie, but taken up without it, and again&s;t it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="6" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. VI.</HI> It is unrea&s;onable to require an undertaking, that the be&s;t government in con&s;titution &s;hould he faultle&s;&s;e in execution; tyrannic more to be feared in In|dependency then in Pre&s;bytery.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 23.</LABEL><HI>B&V;t what if &s;uch at your &s;elfe and &s;ome other godly meeke of your way may propound nothing but wayes of meekne&s;&s;e, can you undertake to &s;ecure the people for hereafter, and for all, and for the way in its own nature?</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="14" REF="23">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> It is a mo&s;t unrea&s;onable thing that you &s;hould require &s;uch a &s;ecuritie of tho&s;e who have the greate&s;t authoritie in their hands, much le&s;&s;e &s;hould you looke for it from any private man, Mini&s;ter or other; &s;ince no government how warrantable &s;o ever, if ma|naged by &s;infull man, can be &s;ecured from all abu&s;e, either by falling &s;hort of dutie, by remi&s;ene&s;&s;e, or over&s;hooting it by rigour; But Sir any rationall man that knoweth the regular con&s;titution of the Presbyteriall Government, and the experimentall execution of it in the Churches where it is e&s;tabli&s;hed, may be more bold to un|dertake for it, both for the government it &s;elfe, and for the mo&s;t probable con&s;equences of it, then any may engage for the way of Independency, and the manifold evill effects and fruits of it, whereof &s;ee M^r.<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">c. 3. a p 59, &amp;c.</NOTE> <HI>Bayly his Di&s;&s;wa&s;ive from errours.</HI></P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 23.</LABEL><HI>You know Epi&s;copacis beganne in meekne&s;&s;e, and Bi&s;hops were brought in fir&s;t for good, and for peace, but how proved they? ty|ranny had ever a countenance of meekne&s;&s;e, and love, till it got &s;eated on the throne.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Epi&s;copacie began at &s;uch a time as this wherein we live, and upon occa&s;ion of &s;uch an evill as now is much complained of, <HI>viz.</HI> the turning of Religion into Faction, and it was taken up as a remedy again&s;t it; but when in &s;tead of an Antidote again&s;t con|tention, it became an Engine of oppre&s;&s;ion, by the &s;lothfulne&s;&s;e of &s;ome, as well as by the ambition of others, (for if &s;ome had not beene willing to do too little, others had not been able to u&s;urpe too much) Presbytery was by the Reformed Churches re&s;tored, and the pre&s;idencie which before was perpetuall, (for feare of the returne of tyranny) was made &s;o mutable, that none might be ambitious of it, or injurious by it. And if <HI>tyranny</HI> have (as you &s;ay) <HI>a countenance of meekne&s;&s;e, and love untill it get to be &s;eated on the throne,</HI> it may be probable that Independencie is preparing for a tyranny, for it pretends much meekne&s;&s;e and love, and if it could prevaile, it is like it would &s;oone &s;et up the tyranny which
<PB N="15" REF="23">now it di&s;claimeth in others; For the ob&s;ervation of <HI>Machiavell</HI> would in all probability prove true in many of tho&s;e who meete in Independencie,<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Homines &s;ub|inde magis ma|gi&s;&abque; ambitio&s;o<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> fieri, primo enin<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> co &s;pectare ne ab aliis, oppriman|tur, po&s;tea etia<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> co euiti ut ip&s;i alios opprimere po&s;&s;ins. <HI>Machi|avel. di&s;p. l. 1. c. 46. p. 188.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Men</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>grow more and more ambi|tious, for fir&s;t, they &s;ee to them&s;elves that they be not oppre&s;&s;ed, but afterwards their endeavours are to oppre&s;&s;e others;</HI> So it was with the Anabapti&s;ts in <HI>Germanie,</HI> and &s;o it would be in many of the &s;ame &s;pirit, e&s;pecially &s;uch as are hardened by the warres in all kinds and degrees of inhumane ho&s;tility; and if we may judge of their &s;pirit by the &s;pightfull, di&s;dainfull, and wrathfull writings, and threats, and facts of many of them who &s;ort them&s;elves under <HI>In|dependency,</HI> and their oppo&s;ites under the name of <HI>Popi&s;h, Anti|chri&s;tian,</HI> and <HI>prophane,</HI> we can expect no moderation or mercy from them, if their might were matchable to their Malignity.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="7" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. VII.</HI> Of the power of the Pre&s;bytery for reformation of manners, compared with Prelacy; the evill effects of Independencie; the difference betwixt a di&s;cipline; and the di&s;cipline, <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his precipitancie in writing, and in divul|ging what he hath written of Po|pery in the Covenant, or un|der the Covenant.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 24.</LABEL><HI>LOoke into other Reformed Kingdomes, and &s;ee what power of godline&s;&s;e is there by rea&s;on of it; doe we not &s;ee huge bodies of Nations very &s;infull, corrupt, and formall? for</HI> Scotland, <HI>our Bre|threns preaching and watchfulne&s;&s;e, it may be more powerfull in a reformation of them then their government; and further I deny not but a Government of that nature may much reforms the outward man: Prelacy and Bi&s;hops had a government which was Antichri|&s;tian, yet by an exact execution, &amp;c.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In granting that you doe, I &s;hall not need to trouble my &s;elfe
<PB N="16" REF="24">with what you deny; it is enough for the pre&s;ent point, which you yeeld, that the Government may much reforme the out|ward man; and for the inward, you acknowledge preaching and watchfulne&s;&s;e may be more powerfull, (as in the Kingdome of <HI>Scotland</HI>) and &s;o doe I; and for that you &s;ay of the Presbyteriall Government, if it be Antichri&s;tian, as you &s;ay, it is not like it &s;hould be ble&s;&s;ed with &s;o good &s;ucce&s;&s;e as the Chri&s;tian Govern|ment of the Presbytery; and if that be deficient to reformation (as no power put into the hands of man is every way perfect in any Kingdome) the defects may be referred to &s;ome other re|qui&s;ites to &s;uch a purpo&s;e, rather then to Presbytery it &s;elfe; but where other Ordinances are not wanting, either in a right rule, or in a regular practice, there Presbyterie formed up to &s;uch di|rections and examples as are found in Scriptures, and the be&s;t re|formed Churches, is a better meanes to make men both Civil and Religions, then any Di&s;cipline or Government which hath been ordained and ob&s;erved in the Church, &s;ince Popery and Super&s;titi|on were excommunicated out of it.</P>
<P>As for Independency, which is your darling on which you dote, and in zeale unto it, hate the Presbyteriall Government, we &s;ee by &s;ad experience that as it hath prevailed, here&s;ies, &s;chi&s;mes, and all manner of licentious exorbitancies have increa&s;ed, though it have not beene &s;et up by Authoritie, but &s;uffered by connivences what might be expected from it, if (which God forbid) the &s;ol|licitations and endeavours for it &s;hould advance to a toleration of it?</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 24.</LABEL><HI>For your other rea&s;on, that my Texts make again&s;t not onely the &s;u&s;pending for a time, but for ever, I an&s;wer: It is true, principles and circum&s;tances con&s;idered, for if neither the Government be Chri&s;ts, nor the people Nationally a Church, &amp;c. &mdash; how or when can you &s;ettle it, or what will you &s;ettle, or upon whom?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><HI>For your other rea&s;on, that my Texts make again&s;t not onely the &s;u&s;pending for a time, but for ever:</HI> S^r. in the&s;e words (though they be but few) as &s;poken in my name there be two great <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word">, for
<PB N="17" REF="24">they are contrary both to your meaning and mine; to yours, be|cau&s;e there is your mi&s;pri&s;ion of one word for another, yea for a contrary, for you &s;hould &s;ay <HI>for,</HI> and you &s;ay <HI>again&s;t the &s;u&s;pending, &amp;c.</HI> but as to me it may be thought my corruption, for you make me to allow of your Texts, as making for your purpo&s;e, whereas I &s;ay,<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Mine <HI>Exam.</HI> and Re&s;olu|tion. p. 10.</NOTE> <HI>For tho&s;e two Texts which he alledgeth for the deferring of the Government, (and if there be any weight in them as to that pur|po&s;e they make again&s;t it, not for a time onely, but for ever) I com|mend to his con&s;ideration, &amp;c.</HI> but you leave out the parenthe&s;is, which intimates my minde to be, that tho&s;e Texts doe not make for your purpo&s;e. And whereas you demand <HI>how, and when can you &s;ettle it, or what will ye &s;ettle, or upon whom?</HI> the&s;e are no Que|&s;tions meet to be propounded to me, (who take not upon me to &s;ettle any government) but to the Parliament, who in part have really an&s;wered them already, and will doe it I hope more &s;pee|dily and more fully then you would have them.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 25.</LABEL><HI>I plead for a delay onely in &s;etting up a Di&s;cipline, not the Di&s;ci|pline; or more plainly, that the Di&s;cipline be &s;uch that the Covenan|ters may not violate that Article wherein they are bound to doe every thing according to the Word, and &s;o prove unfaithfull in their Co|venant, while they are mo&s;t zealous for it.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>And the Presbyterians plead not for a Di&s;cipline in common, but for the Di&s;cipline in &s;peciall, which is mo&s;t agreeable to the word of God, again&s;t which they will admit of nothing; and if to it they adde &s;omething (wherein the word leaves them to make out by prudence, and exemplary conformity what is of nece&s;&s;ary practice, and not pre&s;cribed in the Scriptures) they are not to be charged with doing any thing either again&s;t the Word, or again&s;t the Covenant.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 25.</LABEL><HI>And for the title of Popery which I put upon &s;uch an obedience, which you &s;ay cannot be, becau&s;e di&s;covered in the next Article of the
<PB N="18" REF="25">Covenant; I an&s;wer, the Popery is not in the Covenant, but in the mi&s;interpretation upon it, and the mi&s;taken practi&s;e of it, which is the thing which I onely averre.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>This pa&s;&s;age, as the la&s;t but one, to which I might adde many more, &s;hews your precipitancie in &s;ending forth your fancies to publique view; you glory in the quick di&s;patch of your Pen, and that there may be no delay at the Pre&s;&s;e, one Printer will not &s;erve your turne for your Booke, though of no great bulke, but two at the lea&s;t mu&s;t be imployed for expedition in it; and when it is Printed, though there be very many and gro&s;&s;e e&s;capes, it mu&s;t not &s;tay to be revi&s;ed, that any thing mi&s;taken by a Catalogue of the Errata may be corrected; &s;o all things concur for application of the Proverbe to your Dictates, <HI>Fe&s;tinans canis caecos parit catules;</HI> and &s;o doe you put <HI>di&s;covered</HI> for <HI>di&s;avowed</HI> in the next Article; betwixt which words there is &s;o great difference, that <HI>di&s;covered</HI> is for your opinion, <HI>di&s;avowed</HI> for mine; but you have your di&s;co|very, and it is of Popery, not in the Covenant, but in the interpreta|tion upon it, and the mi&s;taken practi&s;e of it; but who&s;e interpre|tation is this? to me it appeares to be yours, by your next words.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 25.</LABEL><HI>Oh how &s;oon may we be Popi&s;h under a covenant again&s;t it<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> I had as great a tythe once as another, but I could not hold it &s;o, neither by Covenant, nor Go&s;pel.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>And may we &s;oon be Popi&s;h under a Covenant again&s;t it? very &s;oon; (for &s;o much your pathetick interrogation imports) then S^r. comfort your &s;elfe, as you are a Patrone of Hereticks and Schi&s;|maticks, (pleading for indulgency to them, and toleration of them, though you know the Covenant is made expre&s;ly again&s;t them) for how &s;oone may Here&s;ie and Schi&s;me increa&s;e under a Covenant again&s;t them?</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="8" TYPE="section">
<PB N="19" REF="25">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. VIII.</HI> Tythes not Jewi&s;h and Popi&s;h, as <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> pretendeth.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 25.</LABEL><HI>VVHat are the maintenance of Mini&s;ters by Tythes? Iewi&s;h and Popi&s;h undeniably, yet no notice of this at all.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>How? <HI>Iewi&s;h and Popi&s;h undeniably?</HI> as undeniably as the Sab|bath was Iewi&s;h when the Prelates &s;o called it, or the Doctrine of the Trinity Popi&s;h as <HI>Valentinus Gentilis</HI> tooke it when he di&s;|liked the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches in that Article,<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Quod Eccle&s;ia reformatae adhuc in fide Trinitatis cum Papi&s;tis conveniret Bell. praefat. in libr. de Christo. Tom. <HI>1.</HI> &s;ccund Contro|ver&s;. general. p <HI>271.</HI></NOTE> becau&s;e they agreed with the Papi&s;ts therein. You are gro&s;ly mi|&s;taken S^r. in the tenure of Tythes; for though there be a clamour taken up again&s;t them, by &s;uch as make no &s;cruple either of &s;lan|der, or of &s;acriledge, and &s;ome would change the Mini&s;ters por|tion, which is their Ma&s;ters wages for his own worke, and reduce them to voluntary pen&s;ions of the people, becau&s;e they would have a liberty to begger them, who will not humour them in their fond, and fal&s;e opinions, and licentious practices, but oppo&s;e them as of con&s;cience they are bound to doe, neither you nor all your party can prove them either <HI>Iewi&s;h,</HI> or <HI>Popi&s;h,</HI> as they are allowed, and received for the maintenance of the Mini&s;ters of <HI>England;</HI> And becau&s;e you are &s;o confident in your opinion of M^r. <HI>Nye,</HI> whom with M^r. <HI>Goodwin</HI><NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 14.</NOTE> you cite for a worthy &s;aying touching the <HI>Golden Ball of Government,</HI> I refer you for &s;atisfaction to him, who will tell you as he hath done divers others, that Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel may hold, and receive Tythes for their maintenance, by a right and title, which is neither Iewi&s;h nor Popi&s;h, but truly Chri&s;tian; and there is nothing Iewi&s;h or Popi&s;h in Tythes but the A&s;&s;ignation of the <HI>decima decimarum</HI> from the<NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Num. 18.28.</NOTE> Leviticall Prie&s;ts to the high Prie&s;t, from the high Prie&s;t to the<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">In veterilege primitiae debe|bantur &s;acerdo|tibus, decima autem Levitis, &amp; quia &s;ub &s;a|cerdotibus Le|vitae cram, Do|minus mandavi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> ut ip&s;i loco deci|marum &s;olverent &s;ummo &s;acerdor<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> decimam deci|mae: unde nunc cadem ratione tenentur Clerici &s;ummo pontifici decimam dare &s;i exigeret. Aquin. Sum. <HI>22.</HI> q. <HI>87.</HI> a. <HI>4.</HI> ad <HI>3.</HI> Soto <HI>9.</HI> Ju&s;t. q. <HI>4.</HI> art. <HI>4.</HI> ad <HI>3.</HI> Lorin. in Num. <HI>18.</HI> v. <HI>28.</HI> p. <HI>687.</HI></NOTE> Pope, and from the Pope to the King; when fir&s;t Pope <HI>&V;rbane</HI> gave them to <HI>Richard</HI> the Second, to aid him again&s;t <HI>Charles</HI> the French
<PB N="20" REF="26">King, and others that upheld <HI>Clement</HI> the Seventh again&s;t him, as <HI>Polydore Virgil</HI><NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Polyd. Virgil. Hi&s;t. l. <HI>16.</HI></NOTE> relateth. And King <HI>Henry</HI> the Eighth taking from the Pope the title of <HI>Head of the Church</HI> to him&s;elfe by<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">An. <HI>26.</HI> Hen. <HI>8.</HI> c. <HI>1.</HI> Polt. A|bri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="3 letters">. p. <HI>561.</HI></NOTE> Act of Parliament, tooke from him the<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Ibid. c. <HI>2.</HI> p. <HI>565.</HI></NOTE> Tenths, and other profits annexed to that title, which were &s;ettled upon the Crowne by Statute in the twenty &s;ixth yeere of <HI>Henry</HI> the Eighth; &s;o that the Iewi&s;h high Prie&s;thood being expired, the Papall Lord&s;hip aboli&s;hed, the Tythes paid under tho&s;e Titles may be called <HI>Iewi&s;h</HI> and <HI>Popi&s;h,</HI> but not that which is a&s;&s;igned for the maintenance of Mini&s;ters, becau&s;e they are yet to doe &s;ervice to their Ma&s;ter, and &s;o to receive the maintenance of his allowance for his worke, which fellow &s;ervants cannot take upon them to take away with|out pre&s;umption; their doore neighbour will not allow them a power to appoint the wages of their &s;ervants, much le&s;&s;e may they u&s;urpe upon the Right of God, and his Mini&s;ters, to alienate them from the &s;upport of his &s;ervice and wor&s;hip; for that is ra|ther Popi&s;h, for the Pope hath tran&s;lated the Tenure from the Mini&s;ters to the Mona&s;teries, to Nunneries, and to what purpo&s;e he thought fit to a&s;&s;igne them, and thence came in the tran&s;lation of titles from the incumbent Mini&s;ters, the making of Lea&s;es by the Bi&s;hop, Patrone and Incumbent, without &s;tint and terme of yeeres to Lay per&s;ons, untill they were re&s;trained by the<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">S^r. <HI>Edw. Cooke</HI> in the fir&s;t part of the In&s;titut. of the Lawes of <HI>England.</HI> l. 1. c. 7. Sect. 58. fol. 44. p. 1.</NOTE> State in the 1. of <HI>Eliz.</HI> 13. &s;o that if you have given up your tithes to your Pari&s;hioners of <HI>Bra&s;teed,</HI> and told the Committee of Exa|minations &s;o, (as you imply in the pa&s;&s;age repeated) you are more Popi&s;h therein then other Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, who retaine them and officiate to the people that pay them in all the Ordi|nances of Chri&s;t, which you refu&s;e to doe; and as I heare, you have renounced your Ordination to the Mini&s;tery; if &s;o, there is no rea&s;on you &s;hould have them, whether they be lewi&s;h, Popi&s;h, or Chri&s;tian.</P>
<P>You will &s;ay perhaps I make this plea of the tenure of Tythes for my profit, whereas it would be more for the &s;ecuritie of my con&s;cience, and &s;upport of my credit again&s;t the imputation of covetou&s;ne&s;&s;e, to give them up as antiquated Coremonies, as you have done; and truly S^r. if I had ever thought them either <HI>Iewi&s;h</HI> or <HI>Popi&s;h,</HI> I &s;hould rather have &s;et you an example of re&s;illing
<PB N="21" REF="26">them, then (being your Senior, as I am) have &s;uffered you to be before me as my patterne for a con&s;cientious recu&s;ancie of &s;uch a revenue; But I never read in any Booke, much le&s;&s;e in yours, (wherein in ca&s;e of Tythes you play not the <HI>Di&s;putant,</HI> but the <HI>Dictator</HI>) which could make me &s;u&s;pect them to be Anti-Evan|gelicall; nor hath any re&s;pect to advantage made me of a better opinion of their title then yours, &s;ince I have rejected the offer of thrice as much benefit by Tythes as now I have. And if Tythes were taken away, I am confident I &s;hould be no lo&s;er by another allowance; though it may be I may fall under a mi&s;repre&s;enta|tion, as if I argued for them as <HI>Demetrius</HI> for the honour of <HI>Di|ana,</HI> when I mind <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="4 letters">ing more then the gaine of Tythes, as he did the gaine of her &s;ilver Shrines; and I may the rather &s;u&s;pect it from &s;ome of your &s;ide, (though not from you) becau&s;e I find the like charge laid upon M^r. <HI>Edw.</HI> by<NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg"><HI>Whi&s;p. in the eare of</HI> M^r. Tho. Edw. p. 1.2.15.</NOTE> M^r. <HI>W.W.</HI> in his <HI>Whi&s;per in his care:</HI> wh<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> as he is like <HI>Luther</HI> in the vigour and freedome of his &s;pirit, &s;o is he, as <HI>Luther</HI> &s;aid of him&s;elfe, of all &s;innes the free&s;t from covetou&s;ne&s;&s;e; and on my knowledge, whereas he hath had the offer of many good Benefices, he re&s;u&s;ed them, and hath no Tythes at all for his maintenance, but a voluntary pen&s;ion, which is not competent for his charge, or paines either in an an&s;werable preportion, or a &s;ea&s;onable payment; and yet is he contented with it, minding much more the doing of the worke he undertooke, then the receiving of the wages.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="9" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. IX.</HI> Of <HI>M^r. Colemans</HI> ob&s;ervation of the Church of <HI>Scotland.</HI></HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 28.</LABEL><HI>TO your other of the ble&s;&s;ings, and ble&s;&s;ed fruits in</HI> Scotland, <HI>th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> there is no Here&s;ie nor Schi&s;me, l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">t</HI> M^r. Coleman <HI>our learned and pious Brother &s;peake for us both from his experiences.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>I <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> by this pa&s;&s;age you have not read the Booke you pretend
<PB N="22" REF="27" MS="y">to an&s;wer; for M^r. <HI>Colemans</HI> experience was not of Here&s;ie, and Schi&s;me in the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> but (as he gave in&s;tance) of the Presbyteries u&s;urpation of the power of bani&s;hment; and if you meane M^r. <HI>Colemans charge</HI> for that, (as I &s;uppo&s;e you doe) you might have taken notice of an An&s;wer to it in the &s;eventh Section of mine <HI>Examination</HI> of your <HI>New Quere,</HI> p. 21. which, though it were in part but conjecturall, is confirmed by a more certain An&s;wer of the Reverend Commi&s;&s;ioner M^r.<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>M^r.</HI> Gillespie <HI>his</HI> Nihil Re|&s;pondes. p. <HI>24.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Gillespie</HI> in the&s;e words, <HI>What from</HI> Scotland? <HI>I my &s;elfe</HI> (&s;aith M^r. Cole|man) <HI>did heare the Pre&s;byterie of</HI> Edinborough <HI>cen&s;ure a woman to be bani&s;hed out of the gates of the City; was not this an incroach|ment? It had beene an incroachment indeed if it had been &s;o. But he will excu&s;e me if I an&s;wer him in his owne Language</HI> (which I <HI>u&s;e not</HI>) p. 3. &amp; 5. <HI>It is at the be&s;t a mo&s;t uncharitable &s;lander, and there was either ignorance or mindle&s;ne&s;&s;e in him that &s;ets it downe.</HI></P>
<P><HI>There is no bani&s;hment in</HI> Scotland <HI>but by the Civill Magi&s;trate, who &s;o farre aydeth and a&s;&s;i&s;teth Church Di&s;cipline, that prefane and &s;candalous per&s;ons, when they are found unruly and incorrigible, are puni&s;hed with bani&s;hment, or otherwi&s;e. A &s;tranger coming at a time into one of our Pre&s;byteries, and hearing of &s;omewhat which was re|pre&s;ented to, or reported from the Magi&s;trate, ought to have &s;o much circumspection and charitie as not to make &s;uch a ra&s;h and un|true report. He might have at lea&s;t inquired when he was in</HI> Scot|land, <HI>and informed him&s;elfe better, whether Pre&s;bytery or the Civill Magi&s;trate doe bani&s;h. If he made no &s;uch inquirie, he was ra&s;h in judging: if he did, his offence is greater, when after information he will not under&s;tand.</HI> And if you put your cau&s;e to the arbitration of M^r. <HI>Coleman,</HI> you will find cau&s;e by the &s;entence to conceive him to be no more an Independent, then we have to take him to be a Presbyterian; and I &s;uppo&s;e I may &s;ay he is more ours then yours, &s;ince he hath put him&s;elfe into the A&s;&s;ociation of a <HI>Cla&s;&s;icall A&s;|&s;embly,</HI> in the Province of <HI>London;</HI> how&s;oever whether he prove a Participle, or a Neuter, I know you will not be concluded by his either opinion, or practi&s;e, no more &s;hall we.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="10" TYPE="section">
<PB N="23" REF="27">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. X.</HI> A Compari&s;on of young men and old, for prudence and coun&s;ell. Of vi&s;ions and dreames, where the &s;econd of <HI>Ioel ver&s;. 28.</HI> and <HI>Act. 2.17.</HI> are vindicated from <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his mi&s;taking and mi&s;application of them.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 29.</LABEL><HI>To that of</HI> Iob &mdash; <HI>which you apply in way of reproach to the younger, whom you call as it were greene heads, &amp;c.</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke.</HI> p.. 29.</NOTE></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In &s;tead of acknowledgement of your mi&s;application of <HI>Iob</HI> 32. <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 6, 7. where with I charge you, Sect. 4. pag. 14. of my Booke, you lay a charge upon me, for reproaching the younger with the name of <HI>green-heads.</HI> That the impartiall Reader may be the better able to judge betwixt us both, I will &s;et down fir&s;t my words to you, then yours to me; my words are the&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>For his Epiphonema with the words of</HI> Elihu <HI>forementioned, which are taken out of</HI> Iob 32. ver&s;. 6, 7. Why doe not dayes &s;peake, and multitude of yeares teach knowledge? <HI>they make nothing for his purpo&s;e; for the meaning of them is not, that Government, or Di|&s;cipline, or any other u&s;efull thing &s;hould not be with all convenient &s;peed e&s;tabli&s;hed, but that</HI> the ancient with whom is wi&s;dome, <HI>Iob</HI> 12.12. the gray-headed and very aged men, <HI>Chap.</HI> 15.10. <HI>who have had the experience of many dayes and yeeres, &s;hould be heard, and heeded in matters of advi&s;e, and con&s;ultation, before &s;uch green-headed Coun&s;ellours as</HI> Rehoboam <HI>followed to his ruine,</HI> 1 Kings 12.13, 14.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 29.</LABEL>And your An&s;wer to them is, <HI>The elder I e&s;teeme as Fathers, and the younger we know are &s;uch in whom the Lord &s;peakes more gloriou&s;ly, as he him&s;elfe &s;aith, Your young men &s;hall &s;ee vi&s;ions, and upon your &s;onnes and daughters will I powre out my &s;pirit, your old men &s;hall dreame deames. Now whether is it more excellent to dreame
<PB N="24" REF="28">dreames, or to &s;ee vi&s;ions? The Lord delivered I&s;rael by the young men of the Provinces; Surely we may more &s;afely hearken to the younger that &s;ee vi&s;ions of reformation, then to the elder that dreame dreames of it onely.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>I &s;pake no more either in prai&s;e of old men, or di&s;paragement of young then conduced to cleare the Text in que&s;tion betwixt us, yet thence you have taken occa&s;ion to magnifie young men, and to vilifie the old, alleadging the &s;aying of the Prophet <HI>Ioel, Your old men &s;hall dreame dreames, and your young men &s;hall &s;ee vi&s;ions,</HI> and thereupon demanding, <HI>whether is more excellent to dreame dreames, or to &s;ee vi&s;ions:</HI> you re&s;olve the Que&s;tion your &s;elfe thus; <HI>Surely, we may more &s;afely hearken to the younger that &s;ee vi&s;ions of Refor|mation, then to the elder that dreame dreames of it onely.</HI></P>
<P>And doe all, or onely, or mo&s;t <HI>young men &s;ee vi&s;ions</HI> of Refor|mation? and all, or onely, or mo&s;t <HI>old men but dreame dreames</HI> of it? If there be not &s;uch an Antithe&s;is betwixt them, your com|parative the&s;is is an errour of youth, a &s;lander of age, and I &s;hall not doubt, if you take up a duell with me in this quarrell, with the old mans crutch (bring what weapons you will or can) to beat you out of the field, or at lea&s;t to give you the foyle.</P>
<P>But be&s;ides your di&s;paragement of old men, I have &s;ome what to &s;ay to you for mi&s;taking and mi&s;applying the words of the Pro|phet, <HI>Ioel</HI> 2.28. brought in by the Ape&s;tle, <HI>Act.</HI> 2.17. <HI>fir&s;t,</HI> for the defence of old men; you make as if it were &s;afer to hearken to young men then to them, as if the young men were wi&s;er coun|&s;ellours then the old.</P>
<P>I grant before-hand that &s;ometimes there may be young men, (as <HI>Io&s;eph, Daniel,</HI> and <HI>Samuel,</HI>) who may have a &s;pirit of wi&s;|dome, and thereby may be fit to give coun&s;ell, and to governe the wayes of the aged; but &s;etting a&s;ide &s;ingular and extraordinary examples, compare age &amp; youth in the generall, and the re&s;olution of rea&s;on and example will be, that old men are fitter to direct and guide the young, then contrariwi&s;e; for in old men the pa&s;&s;ions and perturbations of the minde (which give great impediment to prudence, (for they are to rea&s;on as fumes and vapours about a
<PB N="25" REF="28">candle, which dimme the light thereof) are more &s;ubdued then in young men. Be&s;ides experience (which is both the parent of wi&s;dome, of which it is begotten, and the nur&s;e which bringeth it on to a further growth and proficiency) falls not within the fathome of a young mans reach, but of the old man; hence is it that <HI>Solomon</HI> &s;aith; <HI>The hoary head is a <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">rowne of glory if it be found in the way of righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e,</HI> Prov. 16.31. and that by the law, the <HI>younger &s;ort were to ri&s;e up before the hoary head,</HI> and <HI>to honour the face of the old man,</HI> Levit. 19.32. For <HI>with the ancient is wi&s;|dome, and in length of dayes under&s;tanding,</HI> Iob 12.12.</P>
<P>And hence it is, that the Coun&s;ellours and Governours of Com|mon-weales, are called <HI>Senators,</HI> and their A&s;&s;embly<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Senatus nomen dedit aetas, nam i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">dem. patres &s;unt. Quintil. In&s;tit orat. l. <HI>1.</HI> c. <HI>6.</HI> p. <HI>38.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Senatus,</HI> from age: and in the old Te&s;tament they are called <HI>the Elders of I&s;rael,</HI> and in the New tho&s;e who&s;e function requireth of them a wi&s;dome of the be&s;t kinde, and highe&s;t degree, (for it mu&s;t be &s;uch a wi&s;dome as mu&s;t goe beyond his &s;ubtiltie who deceiveth all the world, <HI>Rev.</HI> 12.6.9.) are called <HI>Pre&s;byters,</HI> a word in Greeke of the &s;ame &s;ignification with <HI>Elders</HI> in Engli&s;h. And for exam|ple you cannot be forgetfull of the Story of <HI>R<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">boams</HI> old and young Coun&s;ellours, 1 <HI>King.</HI> 12. nor what prelation is given to the old above the young in that Story; and while you remember it, you &s;hould not &s;way the preeminence on the young mens &s;ide again&s;t the old men, as you have done.</P>
<P>Be&s;ides the Scriptures, there be manifold in&s;tances again&s;t your fence in the difference of age and youth, I will minde you of &s;ome, as that of<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Tuum e&s;t un|decun&abque; evocare &amp; a&s;cribere tibi (exemple Mo&s;is) &s;enes, non juve|nes Ber. de Con&s;. lib. <HI>4.</HI> cap. <HI>4.</HI> col. <HI>886.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Bernard</HI> coun&s;elling <HI>Eugenius</HI> to call to him Coun&s;el|lours (as <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> did) that were old men, not young men; and of the Lacedemonians, of whom<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Apud Lacedae|monies ii qui ampli&s;&s;imuns ma|gi&s;tratum gerunt, ut &s;unt, &s;ic etiam appellantur &s;enes. Cicer. Cat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">. Major. &s;eu de Senect. Tom. <HI>3.</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">|rum Cicer. pag. <HI>408.</HI> in fol.</NOTE> <HI>Cicero</HI> &s;aith, that they who are the chiefe Magi&s;trates, who&s;e authoritie is of mo&s;t ample extent, as they are, &s;o they are called <HI>old men.</HI></P>
<P>And among the Romans aged prudence was &s;o much honou|red, that<NOTE N="c" PLACE="foot">Vt qui&s;&abque; atate antecellit, ita &s;ententia principatum abtine<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">. Ibid. pag. <HI>415.</HI></NOTE> in the Colledge of <HI>Sages,</HI> Sentences were partly valued by &s;enioritie. And there is good ground for this great e&s;timation of old men,<NOTE N="d" PLACE="foot">Maximas Respub. per adole&s;centes labefast<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">s, &agrave; &s;enibus &s;u&s;te<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">ates &amp; re&s;ti<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">as reperia|tis. Ibid. p. <HI>408.</HI></NOTE> for <HI>great Common-weales,</HI> as he &s;heweth, <HI>which have
<PB N="26" REF="29">been ruined by young men, have been repaired and re&s;tored by old men.</HI> Such as <HI>Age&s;ilaus</HI> was, <HI>whom (though among the vulgar E|gyptians, (when he came into their Countrey, and they &s;aw no &s;tate|ly traine about him, but an old gray beard laid on the gra&s;&s;e by the &s;ea&s;ide,) a little man that looked &s;imply on the matter, in a thread bare gowne fell a laughing at him) yet the chiefe Captaines and Go|vernours of King Tachis honourably received, and were marvellou&s;|ly de&s;irous to &s;ee him, for the great fame that went abroad of him and he was famous for his wi&s;dome both Military and Civill,</HI> as<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Plutarch. in Age&s;il. pag. <HI>629.630.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Plu|tarch</HI> reporteth in the Story of his life. To him I could adde ma|ny examples of later time, and neerer home; I will name only one, and that is my Reverend brother<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg"><HI>See his booke</HI> de Diphthongis aut Bivocatibus.</NOTE> M^r. <HI>Tho. Gataker,</HI> who though he have been an old man a great while, hath given (of late &s;ince his &s;ickne&s;&s;e, and &s;ece&s;&s;ion from the A&s;&s;embly) &s;uch a &s;pe|cimen of a pregnant apprehen&s;ion and faithfull memory, as may a&s;&s;ure a judicious Reader, that albeit his body be weake, his braine is not &s;o; though his head have been long gray, his wit is yet greene and flouri&s;hing.</P>
<P>Secondly, Now for mine other exception again&s;t your compa|ri&s;on; In it you not onely give preeminence to young men before old, but preferre them in this, that <HI>young men &s;ee vi&s;ions of refor|mation, and old men dreame dreames of it onely;</HI> wherein you wrap up three particulars, which you take for granted, but it will be an harder taske then you imagine to prove any one of them.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, <HI>That Revelations by vi&s;ions are more excellent then tho&s;e that come by dreames.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, <HI>That vi&s;ions a&s;cribed to young men are denied to old men.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly, <HI>That young men have vi&s;ions of reformation, old men onely dreame of it; whereas</HI></P>
<P>Fir&s;t,<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Duo Revela|tionum modi, per &s;omnium &s;cili|cet &amp; per vi&s;i|onem imaginari|am vigilanti ob|jectam, non &s;e &s;u|perant mutuo ra|tione excellentioris potentiae vel prae&s;tantioris modi cogno&s;cendi, cum uter&abque; perficiatur in imaginativa. Jacob. Bonfrer. in Numb. <HI>12.6.</HI> pag. <HI>78<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">.</HI> col. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> &s;ome learned men have re&s;olved <HI>that vi&s;ions are not more excellent then dreames,</HI> and the rea&s;ons may be; Fir&s;t, becau&s;e in Scripture they are brought in as Revelations, though different, yet without prelation of the one before the other, as <HI>Numb.</HI> 12. <HI>If there be a Prophet among you, I the Lord will make my &s;elfe known unto him in a vi&s;ion, and &s;peake unto him in a dreame,</HI> Num. 12.6.
<PB N="27" REF="29">Secondly, as great matters are repre&s;ented in dreames as in vi&s;i|ons, as the affliction of the children of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> in <HI>Egypt,</HI> and their deliverance was revealed to <HI>Abraham</HI> in a dreame, Gen. 15.12. and the intercour&s;e betwixt heaven and earth, in the mini&s;tery of Angels was repre&s;ented to <HI>Jacob</HI> in a dreame, <HI>Gen.</HI> 28.12. It was in a dreame that <HI>Solomon</HI> had the &s;ingular wi&s;dome imparted to him, 1 <HI>King.</HI> 3.5. By a dreame was the conception of <HI>Ie&s;us Chri&s;t</HI> by the Holy Gho&s;t revealed to <HI>Io&s;eph,</HI> Matth. 1.20. and the plot of perdition again&s;t him, with the way to prevent it, <HI>Matt.</HI> 2.13.</P>
<P>Thirdly, as for the matter, &s;o for the manner, Revelation by a dreame is as cleare, and as &s;ure as by a vi&s;ion; as in that of <HI>Abra|ham,</HI> of <HI>Iacob,</HI> of <HI>Solomon,</HI> of <HI>Io&s;eph</HI> forementioned; to which we may adde that of <HI>Abimelech,</HI> Gen. 20.3. and out of humane Authours; the dreame of<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">Hieron. Epi&s;t. ad Eu&s;toch. de cu&s;tod. Virg. Tom. <HI>1.</HI> p. <HI>146. 147.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Hierome,</HI> wherein he was brought before the Tribunall of Chri&s;t, and denied to be a <HI>Chri&s;tian,</HI> be|cau&s;e he was too much a <HI>Ciceronian,</HI> and was adjudged to bee &s;courged, and was &s;o, and in the morning he found his &s;houlders blew with his beating; and the dreame of<NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">Hospinian. in Hi&s;t. Sacram. part. alt. fol. <HI>26.</HI> &amp; Rivet. Exer|cit. in Gen. <HI>28.</HI> Exercit. <HI>123.</HI> p. <HI>603.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Zuinglius</HI> again&s;t the Ma&s;&s;o, had an evidence of the matter very cleare (though for the Authour he was uncertain.)</P>
<P>But we may &s;ay further that <HI>dreames</HI> have an excellency above <HI>vi&s;ions,</HI> and the rea&s;on is this: That which hath more of God, and le&s;&s;e of man, is more excellent then that which contrariwi&s;e hath more of man and le&s;&s;e of God: now in dreames there is more of God, and le&s;&s;e of man; becau&s;e in &s;leepe the &s;en&s;es are bound up, and &s;o there is more communion betwixt the &s;pirit of God, and the &s;oule of man, and le&s;&s;e interruption in that communion then to men awake; &s;o that in dreames there is no di&s;turbing of the Revelation by the concurrence of &s;en&s;uall objects, no denying or &s;u&s;pending of a&s;&s;ent by examination of rea&s;on, as D^r.<NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Rivet. ubi &s;u|pra.</NOTE> <HI>Rivet</HI> well ob&s;erveth. And the rea&s;on is ratified by naturall Philo&s;ophy, for the minde (&s;aith<NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Viget animus in &s;omniis, liber&abque; &s;en&s;ibus ab omn<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> impeditione cu|rarum jacente et mortuo paene cor|pore. Cicer. de Divinat. lib. <HI>1.</HI> pag. <HI>274.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Cicere</HI>) in dreames is vigorous, being free from &s;en&s;es, and from all interruption of cares, the body, the while being in a manner dead. And el&s;ewhere he<NOTE N="m" PLACE="foot">Dormientium animi maxime declarant divinitatem &s;uam, multa enim cum remi&s;&s;i &amp; liberi &s;int futura prospiciunt, ex que intelligitur quaeles futuri &s;int cum &s;e plane corporis vinculis relaxaverint. Cicer. de Senect. p. <HI>417.</HI></NOTE> &s;aith, that the minds
<PB N="28" REF="30">of men a&s;leepe declare their divinitie, for when they are relaxed and free, they fore&s;ee many future things, whence it may be ga|thered what they will be hereafter, when they are wholly relea|&s;ed from bonds of the body.</P>
<P>The &s;econd Particular which your comparative &s;peech imply|eth is, <HI>that vi&s;ions a&s;cribed to young men are denied to old men;</HI> whereas old men have their vi&s;ions as well as young; as <HI>John</HI> the Evangeli&s;t though he were young when he came fir&s;t to be a Di|&s;ciple of his and our great Ma&s;ter, had his Revelations by vi&s;ion in the I&s;le of <HI>Pathmus</HI> when he was old, <HI>viz.</HI> in the 96. yeer of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> which mu&s;t be at lea&s;t the 80. yeere of <HI>Johns</HI> age, if we &s;uppo&s;e him to be but 14. yeeres old at the entrance of his attendance on him, and younger we cannot rea&s;onably imagine him to have been at that time.</P>
<P>A third thing which <HI>in your compari&s;on of young men and old for vi&s;ions and dreames.</HI> I may not admit of, is, that <HI>you bring it to the matter of reformation, and make it as if the young men had &s;eent a vi&s;ion, and that old men had but &s;ome darke notions of it, like unto a nightly dreame;</HI> which is &s;o pre&s;umptuous and groundle&s;&s;e a conceit that your mo&s;t waking thoughts cannot make it &s;eeme otherwi&s;e to any &s;ound under&s;tanding, then a vapour of a young mans bragge, or the vanity of a &s;ick mans dreame.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="11" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XI. M^r. Saltm.</HI> his in&s;ufficient an&s;wer and figurative tri|fting unworthy of an An&s;wer.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 29.</LABEL><HI>FOr that of the conver&s;ion from Pagani&s;me to Chri&s;tianitie, there is no &s;uch disproportion, &amp;c.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>If the indifferent Reader will turne to the place, <HI>pag.</HI> 15. of my Booke, he &s;hall perceive your An&s;wer to my Text (which you
<PB N="29" REF="30">doe not faithfully repeat) is very in&s;ufficient, and if he read your words fir&s;t, and mine after, he will take them for a confutation of yours, not yours for a confutation of mine; and the like hath been &s;aid by a judicious Reader for a great part of your <HI>Reply.</HI></P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 30.</LABEL><HI>But we are &s;peaking of the &s;pirituall building or Church here, which is the image of the Church above; and as that is of true, reall, e&s;&s;entially &s;pirituall living &s;tones, &s;o the Church below is to con&s;i&s;t at lea&s;t of &s;uch as vi&s;ibly and formally appeare &s;o.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In this and many other pa&s;&s;ages of your Booke you are rather <HI>typicall</HI> in repre&s;entation, then <HI>topicall</HI> in proofe; you follow your Allegory &s;o farre, that to follow you therein is rather to dally then to di&s;pute; Be&s;ides, the re&s;ult of your exception either clo&s;eth with my &s;ence, or &s;trayeth from the que&s;tion in difference be|twixt us; and if in &s;uch particulars I do not trace your &s;teps, think not I could not an&s;wer you, but that I would not trouble my &s;elfe, nor tire the Reader with trifling impertinencie.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="12" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XII.</HI> A compari&s;on of Pre&s;byterians and Independents in point of &s;trictne&s;&s;e and loo&s;ene&s;&s;e in admi&s;&s;ion of mem|bers; of the mixture in the Church of <HI>Corinth.</HI></HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 32.</LABEL><HI>LEt the doores of our Churches be as &s;trait as you imply, I am &s;ure your doores are &s;et open, or rather ca&s;t off the hinges.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>That the doores of our Churches are no &s;traiter may be part|ly imputed to &s;ome of your party, who have no minde of &s;uch a through reformation as would deprive them of an opportunity
<PB N="30" REF="31">and occa&s;ion of gathering of Churches; which could have no pre|tence, if the Reformation were wrought up to &s;uch a pitch as the Presbyterians de&s;ire.</P>
<P>And if our doores be &s;et too open, or ca&s;t off the hinges, it is in permitting Independents &s;uch a libertie of Lecturing in our Churches, to preach again&s;t Presbytery, as they would never yeeld to Presbyterians, were it in their power to prohibit them.</P>
<P>But S^r. I beleeve, in &s;ome re&s;pects neither commendable, nor warrantable, your doores are more open then ours, your hinges more loo&s;e then ours, your walles much more wide, or rather you have neither doores, nor hinges, nor walles to bound your mem|ber&s;hip; for if you had, how could people of <HI>London, Holland, New England,</HI> be members of the &s;ame particular Church, as be|fore hath beene objected unto you? but this is not <HI>cardo contro|ver&s;iae</HI> betwixt you and me.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 32.</LABEL><HI>To that of your challenge that I &s;hould &s;hew any &s;uch example in the New Te&s;tament, of taking out the be&s;t when there was a mixture of holy and profane; I an&s;wer: The&s;e were Gospel Churches ga|thered by the Word and Spirit into Gospel fellow&s;hip, and when you make your Pari&s;hes to appeare &s;uch Churches, then I &s;hall tell you more, till then I &s;hall &s;uspend your challenge.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>By this Reply I &s;ee (though you take time to an&s;wer a chal|lenge) you will rather foile your &s;elfe, then &s;eeme to be foiled by your Antagoni&s;t; for if Go&s;pel Churches, gathered by the Word and Spirit into Go&s;pel fellow&s;hip, as you &s;tate the ca&s;e, may con|&s;i&s;t of &s;uch godly and ungodly members, as were in the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> 1 Cor. 11.21. then for all your pretence of your Go&s;pel way you have no warrant for &s;uch a &s;eparation as you take upon you to make. Be&s;ides, S^r. the &s;eparation of people is not to be va|ried in regard of the Church way of gathering into fellow&s;hip, which is extrin&s;ecall, but in regard of the difference of per&s;ons as they are holy or profane; but with you, it &s;eemes, if the manner of gathering be &s;uch as you call a Go&s;pel way, it matters not
<PB N="31" REF="31">much whether the matter of the Church be holy or unholy; and indeed, though you exclude from coming into your Churches &s;ome kind of wicked ones, you admit of tho&s;e whom without repentance God will never account of the communion of Saints, &s;uch as are notoriou&s;ly covetous, proud, &s;landerous, and malicious, who have no more vi&s;ible intere&s;t in Chri&s;t then a fornicator, or drunkard, a &s;wearer, or Sabbath-breaker.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="13" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XIII.</HI> To whom Chri&s;t is an Head, and how; of his rod of Iron and his Golden Scepter, and of his being a Lord and a &s;ervant; gentle, yet terrible.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 34.</LABEL><HI>IT is true, Chri&s;t is an head, but he is not an head to every body, he will have a body proportionable to his head; is a Nation of all &s;orts a fit body for &s;uch an head? is he not a pure, holy, and glorious head in his Go&s;pel dispen&s;ation? and is a body &s;o leprous, &s;o wicked, &s;o for|mall, &s;o traditionally, and Antichri&s;tianly corrupted a fit body? Shall I take the members of my body, &s;aith</HI> Paul, <HI>and joyne them to an barlot to make one fle&s;h? God forbid; what then &s;hall the head doe with &s;uch members?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>It is true, Chri&s;t is an head, and not an head to every body, but is he not an head to his owne integrall members, becau&s;e the wic|ked mingle with them in an outward profe&s;&s;ion? have hypocrites any more con&s;anguinity with the pure blood of Chri&s;t then pro|fane per&s;ons have? yet Chri&s;t is head of that Church where re|probates are reputed to bee members; and are there not &s;ome branches of the Vine which beare no fruit, and are to be taken a|way? <HI>Joh.</HI> 15.2. who cannot for all that hinder the vitall influence into other branches, as in the example of the Church of <HI>Co|rinth.</HI></P>
<P>And for that you &s;ay of a body <HI>&s;o leprous, &s;o wicked;</HI> as applied
<PB N="32" REF="32">to our Reformation in <HI>furi,</HI> or in <HI>facte,</HI> it is very fal&s;ly reprod chfull, and &s;avours of ungratitude to God, and of Phari&s;aicall di&s;daine of purer Churches then tho&s;e you &s;tand for; wherein you gro&s;ly di|gre&s;&s;e from the moderation whereto you protend.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 34.</LABEL><HI>To that of his ruling with a rod of iron as well as a golden Se<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">er, I an&s;wer.</HI></P>
<P><HI>And doth he rule any in his Church with his rod of iron, who were not called in fir&s;t by his golden Scepter?</HI></P>
<P><HI>And for that of his iron rod in</HI> P&s;al. 2. <HI>it is &s;poken of Chri&s;t not as King of his Church, but of the Nations.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>By this An&s;wer you &s;eeme to forget your owne Argument, which was to prove an un&s;utablene&s;&s;e of the Presbyteriall Go|vernment to the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t; and when I have &s;hewed that the Per&s;on of Chri&s;t is not onely amiable as a Saviour, but formi|dable to offenders as a Lord, having an <HI>iron Rod,</HI> as well as a <HI>golden Seepter,</HI> you &s;ay by way of di&s;tinction that he hath his iron &s;cepter as King of the Nations, not as King of the Church; but if his Church con&s;i&s;t of golden Saints and gilded Hypocrites, (for you &s;ay it con&s;i&s;ts at lea&s;t<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke.</HI> p. 31.</NOTE> <HI>of &s;uch as vi&s;ibly and formally appeare &s;o,</HI> and hypocrites appeare &s;o, and the appearance of Saint&s;hip is the mo&s;t that is in them) he hath and u&s;eth an iron rod to drive away, and to cru&s;h, as well as a golden Scepter to invite and call to his pre|&s;ence; for were not <HI>Ananias</HI> and <HI>Saphira</HI> members of the Church after a Go&s;pel di&s;pen&s;ation? and were they not ruined as well as ruled, when they were both of them &s;uddenly &s;mitten dead for their hypocriticall profe&s;&s;ion? what could an iron rod have done more, if they had taken up heatheni&s;h ho&s;tilitie again&s;t the Church? and was not this exemplary puni&s;hment laid upon them that the Church might feare Chri&s;t as a Lord, as well as love him as a Saviour of his Church, that they might feare his iron rod, as well as love his golden Scepter? &s;ure I am it wrought that effect upon Chri&s;tians in generall, <HI>for feare came upon all the Church, and upon at many as heard the&s;e things,</HI> Act. 5.11.</P>
<PB N="33" REF="32">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 34.</LABEL> <HI>For your other Texts of Chri&s;ts being a &s;ervant and a Lord, a Lambe and terrible, you onely prove what I grant, that he is more a King and a Lordin his Government, then in any other of his Go|&s;pel dispen&s;ations.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In this particular you give me occa&s;ion to returne a piece of your owne Rhetorick upon you, and to call you as you doe me,<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Pag. 17.</NOTE> <HI>a faire enemy,</HI> for you repeat my proofes &s;o fully here (though el&s;e-where you mi&s;erably maime and mangle them) that you may be thought to have done as <HI>Bellarmine</HI> is &s;aid to doe in his <HI>Con|trover&s;ies,</HI> viz. to bring in more of the Prote&s;tants Objections then he is able to an&s;wer; But when you &s;ay that <HI>I prove onely what you grant, that he is more a King and Lord in his Govern|ment, then in any other of his Go&s;pel dispen&s;ations;</HI> you invert the order of the words you &s;hould ob&s;erve; for you &s;hould have ra|ther &s;aid, <HI>You now grant what I have proved,</HI> for I never knew &s;o much of your mind in this matter before; and you grant &s;o much as might have &s;pared a great part of your Reply to me; for the Lord&s;hip of his Government was the matter in que&s;tion, and that being granted by you, the Presbyteriall Government is not &s;o incon&s;i&s;tent or un&s;utable with the condition of Chri&s;ts de&s;cription of him&s;elfe as you would make it.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="14" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XIV.</HI> The Pre&s;byteriall Government not un&s;utable to the con|dition of Chri&s;t; the prevailing of Independents, and of the Sects that meet in Independencie, much more terrible then the Pre&s;byte|riall Government can be.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 34, 35.</LABEL><HI>B&V;t all this will not prove the Lord&s;hip of &s;uch a Pre&s;bytery or Government; cert ainely you intend a terrible government, be|cau&s;e
<PB N="34" REF="33">you bring in the&s;e Texts that have judgement and &s;everitie in them, which Chri&s;t threatens to the Nations and Kings of the earth and not to his Churches; will you make Chri&s;t rule in his Church as he doth in the World? well, let your Pre&s;bytery enjoy the iron &s;cepter, while the Churches of Chri&s;t enjoy the golden, and try if you ruine not more then you rule.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>The&s;e proofes were not brought to prove a Presbyterial Go|vernment, but <HI>dato &s;ed non conce&s;&s;o,</HI> that it was &s;evere, it was not &s;oun&s;utable to the condition of Chri&s;t as you pretended. And for that you &s;ay, <HI>certainly you intend a terrible Government,</HI> though you &s;peake to me, you doe not meane it of me, for you have &s;aid<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Smoke, p. 23.</NOTE> before, <HI>What if &s;uch as your &s;elfe, and &s;ome other godly meeke of your way propound nothing but wayes of meekne&s;&s;e to your &s;elves, can you undertake, &amp;c.</HI> whereby you &s;eeme to acquit me from the ac|cu&s;ation of &s;uch rigour as you &s;u&s;pect in others; and if that be your meaning, you are not mi&s;taken in my &s;pirit, for if I know any thing of it, it is farre from that height of heat again&s;t any oppo&s;ers what|&s;oever which was in the Di&s;ciples of our Saviour again&s;t the <HI>Sa|maritans,</HI> when they received him not, <HI>Luk.</HI> 9.54.</P>
<P>And I confe&s;&s;e, in the pre&s;ence of God who knoweth the hearts of all men, that if a &s;pirit of meekne&s;&s;e, and &s;weetne&s;&s;e, and of all affectionate and faire in&s;inuations would prevaile with the mo&s;t perver&s;e and bla&s;phemous heretique to winne him to be cordial|ly Chri&s;ts, I could wi&s;h the golden Scepter held out to invite him into the communion of the Church, rather then the iron rod to brui&s;e, or breake, or to affright him from the Church. And though you meane this of others, who &s;hew them&s;elves Zealots for the Presbyteriall Government, you are too incon&s;iderate, too uncha|ritable, too confident in your charge; for how can you be &s;o cer|tain as you make your &s;elfe, when the thing they move for hath no terrour in it; It is true, that according to the French Proverbe, <HI>He that would have his neighbours dog hang'd gives out that he is mad;</HI> &s;o your party that would have the Presbyteriall Govern|ment literally &s;u&s;pended, and made away as a mad dog, as if it would (as <HI>Paul</HI> was before his conver&s;ion) be mad again&s;t the
<PB N="35" REF="33">Saints, <HI>Act.</HI> 26.11. <HI>and breathe out</HI> nothing but <HI>threatnings and &s;laughters again&s;t them,</HI> Act. 9.1. give out that it is an intolerable Tyranny, and ten times wor&s;e then the Prelaticall Domination: When indeed if men will lay a&s;ide all prejudice, partiality, and pa&s;&s;ion, they &s;hall finde the &s;pirit of Independencie more terrible then that of Presbyterie. For,</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> that which is &s;o much &s;tuck at as an incroachment upon Chri&s;tian liberty, and a meanes of the Mini&s;ters domineering over the people, the &s;u&s;pen&s;io~ from the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, are not the <HI>Independents</HI> more rigid then the <HI>Pre&s;byterians</HI> are? for they generally &s;u&s;pend whole Pari&s;hes from the Sacrament (except &s;ome few of their covenanted di&s;ciples) for divers yeers together, without any law or rule at all; the <HI>Pre&s;byterians</HI> gene|rally doe not &s;o; or if &s;ome doe forbeare communions for a time, it is not upon &s;uch principles as the <HI>Independents</HI> maintaine; and they doe all they can to expedite the removall of all &s;candals from the Sacrament, wherein the <HI>Independents</HI> refu&s;e to joyne with them.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> the <HI>Independents</HI> deny not onely the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, as hath been &s;aid, but they deny the Sacrament of Bapti&s;me to all &s;uch as are not the children of their covenanted members; the <HI>Pre&s;byterians</HI> accept of them for a federall holi|ne&s;&s;e profe&s;&s;ed by their parents; and if there were no more but the&s;e two differences betwixt them, it were enough (if men would not give up them&s;elves to be gro&s;ly befooled by flattery and calumny) to cry out upon the <HI>Independents</HI> for their injurious in|va&s;ions upon Chri&s;tian libertie, and to love the <HI>Pre&s;byterians</HI> for their mildne&s;&s;e and charitie in the&s;e particulars: but further,</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> The <HI>Independents</HI> Government (though to &s;peake properly, <HI>Independency</HI> is rather <HI>Anarchy</HI> then <HI>Government</HI>) is more terrible then the <HI>Pre&s;byterian;</HI> becau&s;e under it are united all &s;orts of &s;ectaries, among whom many are of furious &s;pirits, men of blood and Belial, and &s;uch as have made many bloody ma&s;|&s;acres in <HI>Germany,</HI> and have threatned if otherwi&s;e they may not have their will, (their libertie they call it) that they will have it by the &s;word; for have they not an Independent armie to force their way again&s;t the Presbyterians? I quoted to this purpo&s;e M^r.
<PB N="36" REF="34"><HI>Prinnes fre&s;h Di&s;covery,</HI> and D^r. <HI>Ba&s;tw. Preface</HI> to his <HI>&s;econd part of Independency,</HI> but I quoted not their words, now I will, became &s;ince M^r. <HI>Edw.</HI> put forth his la&s;t Booke, &s;ome of that &s;ect have &s;poken bloody words again&s;t his per&s;on; and (though he be &s;o confident in the goodne&s;&s;e of his cau&s;e, and the integrity of his in|tentions, that he beleeves he &s;hould le&s;&s;e feare to be killed, then any to kill him) yet &s;ince I finde the <HI>Independents</HI> deale with the <HI>Pre&s;byterians</HI> as <HI>Ahab</HI> did with <HI>Elijah,</HI> charging him with his own fault, 1 <HI>King.</HI> 18.17. and that like the bea&s;t in the Revelation, <HI>they &s;peake like a dragon,</HI> Revel. 13.11. and are horned rather like a ramme then a lambe, I thinke it fit that their &s;pirit be better known, that they may be le&s;&s;e tru&s;ted; e&s;pecially, where they pretend more meekne&s;&s;e then they finde among <HI>Pre&s;byterians;</HI> their words are the&s;e,</P>
<P>Two Predicant Captaines apprehended, and que&s;tioned for preaching in <HI>Newport Pannell</HI> again&s;t the Ordinance of Parlia|ment of the 26. of <HI>April,</HI> 1645. among other &s;peeches averred,<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>M^r.</HI> Prinnes <HI>Epi&s;t. Dedic. before his</HI> Fre&s;h Di&s;covery of &s;ome prodigi|ous new wan|dring blazing|&s;tarres and fire|brand. <HI>fol. 3. p. a.</HI></NOTE> <HI>That if the godly and well affected party were thus per&s;ecuted, they &s;hould be forced to make a wor&s;e breach then what was yet, when they had done with the Kings party; telling one En&s;igne</HI> Ratford <HI>and his Souldiers that they were wor&s;e then Cavaliers; and that when they had made an end of the warre with the Cavaliers, they &s;hould be forced to rai&s;e a new Army to fight with them.</HI> And in D^r.<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">D^r. <HI>Ba&s;tw.</HI> his &s;econd part of <HI>Independency not Gods Ordi|nance,</HI> in the Preface. fol. 14. p. b. &amp; fol. 15. p. a.</NOTE> <HI>Ba&s;t|wicks</HI> Preface to his &s;econd part of his <HI>Independency not Gods Or|dinance,</HI> he &s;aith thus; <HI>Among tho&s;e they thinke they may confide in, they affirme they will not be beholding to the Parliament nor any body el&s;e for their libertia, for they will have it, and aske them no leave; they have the &s;word now in their hand, and they thinke their partie &s;trong enough to encounter any adver&s;e and oppo&s;ing partie; and they profe&s;&s;e they care not how &s;oone they come to outting of throats, and &s;peake of nothing but the &s;laughtering and butchering of the Pre&s;by|terians.</HI></P>
<P>And though I confe&s;&s;e there may be many <HI>Independents</HI> (and &s;ome I know to be &s;uch as your &s;elfe) of a meeke and gentle di&s;po&s;ition, yet as <HI>Peter Du Moulin</HI> &s;aid of many of the Prie&s;ts in <HI>France,</HI> that they were <HI>for their loyaltis not beholding to the maxim<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> of Italy,</HI> &s;o I &s;ay, for their mookne&s;&s;e they are not be|holding
<PB N="37" REF="34">to the Principles of <HI>Independency;</HI> for where they mo&s;t prevaile they puffe men up in pride, &s;elfe-conceipt, and di&s;daine of their Chri&s;tian brethren, though in gifts and graces farre better then them&s;elves, many of them being Anabapti&s;ts, and of the &s;pi|rit of that in&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">lent hereticke, who, when<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Cum ego hu|maniter pro liu|guae mea more cum compella|rem, nunquam a|liter dignatus e&s;t mecu loqui, quam &s;i cum cane &s;ibi negotium fui&s;&s;et. Cum introductus fui&s;&s;et in Curi|am, voluit primo Syndico a&s;&s;idere; inde repul&s;us, ca|put oculo&s;&abque; tor|quendo, Prophe|ticam Maje&s;ta|tem &s;imulans, <HI>&amp;c. Calvin. E|pi&s;t. Farello, p. 62.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Calvin</HI> had conference with him, and entertained him with termes of humanitie, vouch|&s;afed him none other language then if <HI>Calvin</HI> had been no better then a dogge; and he &s;hewed the arrogancy of his minde by his carriage, and behaviour, as well as by his words, offering to &s;it next to the prime Syndick of the Senate of <HI>Geneva,</HI> and upon the repul&s;e, by the motion of his head, and eyes, &s;ignifying great weath, he tooke upon him a Propheticall Maje&s;tie. And albeit &s;ome take it for a proofe of the goodne&s;&s;e of their cau&s;e, that they have engaged many great and rich men in it, which makes them, as is truly<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg"><HI>M^r.</HI> Baylie <HI>his</HI> Di&s;&s;wa&s;ive from Errours. <HI>cap. 3. pag. 53.</HI></NOTE> ob&s;erved, <HI>Though the &s;malle&s;t of all the &s;ects of the time for their number, yet the greate&s;t for worth of their followers,</HI> yet that in a true Chri&s;tian con&s;ideration makes rather again&s;t it; for by getting &s;o many rich and great men unto their partie, and ayming &s;o much at &s;uch di&s;ciples (with &s;uch neglect of others as is ob&s;erved) &s;hewes that they are not minded as the Apo&s;tle was, when he &s;aid to the Corinthians; <HI>I &s;eeke not yours but you,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12.14. but rather contrariwi&s;e; &s;o that if they would &s;ay, what many by their actions &s;peake, they &s;hould tell their con|verts; <HI>I &s;eeke not you but yours,</HI> or <HI>rather yours then you.</HI> And &s;e|condly, when rich and great men embrace Independency, it may give great cau&s;e of &s;u&s;pition that they doe it, becau&s;e, as rich, they are apt to be high-minded, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 6.17. and all high-minded men are the mo&s;t legitimate &s;onnes of lap&s;ed <HI>Adam,</HI> who would be Independent upon God, and be a God of him&s;elfe, and &s;o they are apt to take up Independency, rather out of an humour of pride, then out of con&s;cience towards either pictie, or truth.</P>
<P><HI>Fourthly,</HI> It is apparent to all how ambitious many Indepen|dents are of all places of honour, of power, and profit, of being Members in the Parliament, prime Officers in the Armie, Com|mittee men; and if any cro&s;&s;e them, what wayes they finde out to be meet with them, &s;ending them tickets, and calling them in que&s;tion, when they know there is no ju&s;t cau&s;e of exception
<PB N="38" REF="35">again&s;t them, of purpo&s;e to ca&s;t an awe upon all men, as if the au|thoritie of the State were at their &s;ervice, to &s;ecure their credits again&s;t all complaints how ju&s;t &s;o ever, and to di&s;countenance tho&s;e who in an ingenuous and generous &s;pirit oppo&s;e their u&s;ur|pations, which are now &s;o vi&s;ible to the view of all that are not wilfully blind, that it is matter of great wonder, that the Presby|terians (who are more in number, and dignitie, then any &s;ect what&s;oever, and if they were as active as they, might much over|top them in power) are &s;o dull and indulgent towards them, as to &s;uffer them &s;till to carry on their de&s;igne as they doe; which in &s;ome Presbyterians for the time pa&s;t may be imputed to their pa|tience, and meekne&s;&s;e of minde, being loth to offend &s;uch; but if it &s;hould be &s;o generall hereafter as it hath been, it might be a&s;cri|bed to a negligence, and coldne&s;&s;e in that cau&s;e which they &s;hould endeavour to promote with all their might in all warrantable wayes of zeale, of indu&s;try, circum&s;pection, and prudence.</P>
<P><HI>Fifthly,</HI> Though you a&s;&s;igne the iron Scepter to the Presbyte|ry, the golden to your Churches, the truth is, if the Indepen|dents were once as Independent as they would be, they would be Ma&s;ters of both metals, both gold and iron; and &s;ome of their party bragge they have both the pur&s;e and the &s;word in their power; if &s;o, (and in &s;uch a degree as they would have it, but it is true but in part, though too much) they that now renounce appeales to Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, and Nationall A&s;&s;emblies, would appeale to the &s;word, and then they would be ready to ruine tho&s;e that would not be ruled by them, to breake tho&s;e that would not bow unto them.</P>
<P><HI>Sixthly,</HI> You cannot finde any thing in the Presbyterians prin|ciples, nor in their practice, as they are Presbyterians, which may be matter, I &s;ay not of conviction, but of &s;u&s;pition of &s;uch a ter|rible government, as you take upon you, with &s;o much confidence, to charge upon them.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="15" TYPE="section">
<PB N="39" REF="35">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XV.</HI> A plea&s;ant reproofe of a mi&s;application of Scripture is no offence, again&s;t the maie&s;tie of the word; how, and in what ca&s;es a taunting &s;peech may be allowed.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 35.</LABEL>I <HI>Wonder that one of your experience in the maje&s;tie of the word &s;hould be &s;o plea&s;ant with a Scripture allegory.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Here you impute unto me that, which (if truly objected) would require a penitentiall confe&s;&s;ion on my part; if untruly, no le&s;&s;e on yours; that it may be more manife&s;t, it will be meet to take no|tice how my words come in upon yours, and yours upon mine. Vpon your mi&s;application of <HI>Matth.</HI> 9.17. <HI>Neither doe men put new wine into old bottles,</HI> my<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Mine Exami|nation. p. 20.</NOTE> words are the&s;e. <HI>Conceiving the Penner to be a &s;ober man, I mu&s;t thinke in this pa&s;&s;age the Printers braine was troubled with the fume of new wine, to conclude with non-&s;ence for a rationall con&s;equence; and I beleeve no new wine and old bottles, how new or old &s;o ever, can wor&s;e agree together, then the foregoing evidence and the finall &s;entence of this paragraph.</HI> Vpon my words your Comment is,</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 35.</LABEL><HI>Becau&s;e the Scripture is of wine, you je&s;t on it, as if it had made the &s;ence le&s;&s;e &s;ober. I am &s;orry my younger pen &s;hould reprove the aged for ie&s;ting, which the Apo&s;tle &s;aith is not convenient. And tru|ly it is not comely for the &s;ervants to play upon the ma&s;ter of the Fea&s;t, or any thing in his hou&s;e, e&s;pecially upon his wine, which alludes &s;o to his blood, and which he hath promi&s;ed to drinke with us new in his Fathers Kingdome.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>To which I an&s;wer; Fir&s;t, That the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Eph.</HI> 5.4. forbid|ding je&s;ting under that word, which in Morall Philo&s;ophy is the title of a vertue, doth not forbid all kinde of je&s;ts, towards all
<PB N="40" REF="36">per&s;ons, and in all ca&s;es; for what was the Irony of God to <HI>Adam, Gen.</HI> 3.22. and of <HI>Elijah</HI> to the Prie&s;ts of <HI>Baal,</HI> 1 <HI>King.</HI> 18.27. but a je&s;ting reproofe?</P>
<P>Secondly, There is a great difference betwixt je&s;ting at Scrip|ture, and at a mi&s;application of Scripture; this may be taunted without any reli&s;h of irreverence at all to the other; for example, a man may give all religious re&s;pect due to the words of our Savi|our, <HI>Ioh.</HI> 21.16. <HI>Feed my &s;heep,</HI> but when<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Bellarm. Tom. <HI>1.</HI> lib. <HI>3.</HI> cap. <HI>1.</HI> de Verbo Dei. p. <HI>184</HI> &amp; <HI>185.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Bellarmine</HI> abu&s;eth them, by wre&s;ting them and inferring from them the proofe of the Su|premacy of the Pope over the univer&s;all Church, I may deride the ab&s;urditie of his &s;equele, without any impeachment of the antece|dent allegation. The like may be &s;aid of <HI>P&s;al.</HI> 91.13. as brought in by Pope<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Foxe Martyro|log. Vol. <HI>1.</HI> pag. <HI>265. printed London.</HI> Ann. <HI>1641.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Alexander,</HI> to prove his proud u&s;urpation over Princes, when at <HI>Venice, Anno</HI> 1159. he &s;et his foot upon the necke of the Emperour <HI>Frederick Barboro&s;&s;e;</HI> the Story whereof, though<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Bin. Tom. <HI>7.</HI> concil. part. alte|ra. p. <HI>629.</HI> col. <HI>1.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Binius</HI> &s;ay it was fained by Henetiques,<NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Vicars Decapl. in lib. P&s;alm. in p. <HI>91.</HI> pag. <HI>268.</HI> col. <HI>2.</HI></NOTE> is &s;et out and is to be &s;eene in a Table at <HI>Venice;</HI> and of the<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">See Paraus in Gen. <HI>28.</HI> ver. <HI>12.</HI> col. <HI>1597.</HI></NOTE> inference which &s;ome make of the ubiquitie of the body of Chri&s;t from the vi&s;ion of <HI>Iacobs</HI> ladder, <HI>Gen.</HI> 28.12. And what re&s;olution can be made of a Popi&s;h glo&s;&s;e on <HI>Gen.</HI> 1.10. (according to the Latine Tran&s;lation, <HI>Congregationem aquarum vecavit maria,</HI> applying it to the prai&s;e of the Virgin <HI>Mary</HI>) without &s;uch a &s;coffe as may expo&s;e the Authours ridiculous de&s;cant to &s;corne and laughter? which repeat|ed by a learned Hebrician he begins the report with<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Audi Lector &amp; ride. Sixt. Amam. Anti|barbar. Bibl. l. <HI>2.</HI> p. <HI>287.</HI></NOTE> <HI>heare Rea|der and laugh.</HI> And if I thought your quotation of <HI>Matth.</HI> 9.17. were as wide from the &s;cope, and as weake for the proofe of that for which it was produced by you, as &s;ome of the&s;e now men|tioned allegations are, (wherein there are divers judicious and religious Readers concurring with me) I might (re&s;erving all due re&s;pect to that &s;acred Text) entertaine your mi&s;application of it, rather with a je&s;ting correction, then a &s;erious conviction.</P>
<P>You will &s;ay perhaps, (as in<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p.. <HI>59.</HI></NOTE> another place you have done) that <HI>mi&s;-application is a word &s;ooner written then proved,</HI> and<NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> <HI>you would have the Reader iudge</HI> (&s;o would I, if he be neither imprudent nor partiall) whether it be your mi&s;application or my mi&s;interpre|tation; and let him judge al&s;o whether <HI>mi&s;-interpretation</HI> be not a word &s;ooner written then proved, as well as <HI>mi&s;application</HI> is;
<PB N="41" REF="36">and let him further judge whether the&s;e words of yours <HI>[I am &s;orry my younger pen &s;hould reprove the aged for is &s;ting, which the Apo&s;tle faith is not convenient]</HI> &s;hould have been uttered by you in a je&s;ting or jeering way, as they are; and whether now you &s;hould not be &s;orry in good earne&s;t, that your younger pen was &s;o forward to blet the face of the aged with &s;uch a blacke a&s;per&s;ion, as <HI>uncomely ie&s;ting at the Scripture,</HI> and (being but a &s;ervant) <HI>playing upon the Ma&s;ter of the Fea&s;t, or any thing in his hau&s;e, e&s;pe|cially upon his wine which alludes to his blood, and which he hath pro|mi&s;ed to drinke new with us in his Fathers Kingdome.</HI></P>
<P>It would better have becomed you (e&s;pecially profe&s;&s;ing &s;uch re&s;pect to me as you doe in your Letter and<NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 16.</NOTE> el&s;e-where) to have taken my je&s;ting, as I meant it, with a candid acceptation; as the laughter of <HI>Ioh</HI> was received by younger men then him&s;elfe; <HI>If I laughed</HI> (faith he) <HI>they beleeved it not, and the light of my coun|tenance they ca&s;t not down,</HI> Iob 29.24. that is, (as the La&s;t Annota|tions expound it) <HI>they thought a man of my gravitie would not be &s;o familiar with them,</HI> or as <HI>Grotius</HI> makes the note:<NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Etiam joca mea putabant aliquid occultare &s;erii. <HI>Grot. in Job 29.24.</HI></NOTE> <HI>They thought &s;ome &s;erious matter lay laid under my ie&s;ting,</HI> and my familiaritie did not cau&s;e them to grieve, be angry, or contemne me, <HI>or</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Authoritas mea mihi apud ip&s;os con&s;tabat. <HI>Grot. Ibid.</HI></NOTE> <HI>my authoritie &s;uffered no diminution by that meanes, or upon that oc|ca&s;ion.</HI></P>
<P>You frame the like objection again&s;t me for<NOTE N="m" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 41.</NOTE> <HI>being too plea|&s;ant with your expre&s;&s;ion of the truth by a &s;tarre, becau&s;e it is the ve|ry allegory of the &s;pirit,</HI> and &s;o was that which <HI>Barchoche has</HI> allu|ded unto, <HI>Numb.</HI> 24.17. yet was his mi&s;application of it ju&s;tly entertained with a taunt, and his name with deri&s;ion turned into <HI>Be<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">bozba,</HI> the <HI>&s;onne of a lie,</HI> for which I quoted two grave Au|thours in mine<NOTE N="n" PLACE="marg">Pag. 27.</NOTE> <HI>Examination of your Quere.</HI> You &s;ay there was more light&s;omne&s;&s;e then light in that pa&s;&s;age, and I beleeve there was more light al&s;o then in mo&s;t parts of your Booke, which you have &s;moked in every page; you will &s;ay perhaps that here againe I am too plea&s;ant with your Scripture evidence, but let me tell you S^r. without offence, you are ob&s;erved to play upon the Sacred ground-worke with too much boldne&s;&s;e, and wanto<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">ne&s;&s;e of wit, to make many <HI>allu&s;ions</HI> which are but <HI>illu&s;ions</HI> of your owne mi&s;|informed &s;ancie; and they take the Title of your Book to be very
<PB N="42" REF="37">fanta&s;ticall, and (be&s;ides many je&s;ts which have pa&s;&s;ed upon it by &s;ome ingenuous Readers, which I forbeare, le&s;t I &s;hould make you angry with that which made them merry) while I was writing this, there came to my hands a Latine Letter form a very learned and religious Divine, with whom I have a commerce of Letters in that Language, wherein he takes your An&s;wer (which you call a <HI>full an&s;wer unto</HI> me) to have none other fulne&s;&s;e in it then a<NOTE N="o" PLACE="marg">Per&s;uafi&s;&s;i|mum habco&mdash;po&s;tertorem ejus (&s;cil. libri) par|tem, quae respon|&s;um tuum per|&s;tring it, merum fumum e&s;&s;e, &s;a|cillime&abque; uno tctu calami tui di&s;|&s;ipatum iri, &amp;c.</NOTE> fume and vapour, which will ea&s;ily vani&s;h into nothing.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="16" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XVI.</HI> Of the Pre&s;byteriall and Independent Government how affected; the &s;low proceeding of the Church Government made no Argument for it, nor mentioned to the disparagement of the Parliament; <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> brings the Parliaments Authority un|der popular liberty; of the wheat in In|dependent Congregations.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 38.</LABEL><HI>PRove your Argument</HI> (Government, you would &s;ay) <HI>fir&s;t to be Chri&s;ts, the particulars and entirene&s;&s;e accordingly, and then I &s;hall allow you your Argument; but you grant it to be but partly Chri&s;ts, partly the A&s;&s;emblies, or of prudence.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>It is no part of mine undertaking to prove the Presbyteriall Government to be Chri&s;ts Government, nor is it needfull &s;o to doe; for I have told you where it is done already, which no man hath refuted nor can doe; nor is it needfull to a&s;&s;ert every part of it by expre&s;&s;e Scripture; and if the Independent platforme be ac|cording to the pure Go&s;pel patterne, as you phra&s;e it, why have not your Brethren cleared that doubt all this while, having been ingaged thereto by promi&s;e, and often called upon for perfor|mance thereof?</P>
<PB N="43" REF="37">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 38.</LABEL> <HI>To your la&s;t that the Reformation hath proceeded by &s;low paces, and degrees; What, would you prove it by its &s;low proceeding to bee Chri&s;ts Government, and therefore to be &s;etled? that were a &s;trange kinde of rea&s;oning.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>I &s;ee it is not &s;trange with you to mi&s;take, or pervert a plaine truth; for did not you plead again&s;t the &s;peedy &s;etling of the Presbyterian Government by the example of Chri&s;t? and was not mine<NOTE N="p" PLACE="marg">See Sect. 8. p. 23. of mine <HI>Examination.</HI></NOTE> An&s;wer to this purpo&s;e, <HI>Chri&s;t was not &s;o long in &s;et|ling of his Government, nor the Parliament and A&s;&s;embly &s;o ha&s;ty as you pretended.</HI> Is this a proofe of mine opinion, I pray you, or a confutation of yours?</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 41.</LABEL><HI>Why &s;hould you &s;peake of the Governments fluttering on a lime|twigge at</HI> We&s;tmin&s;ter? <HI>&s;ure the State or Parliament may de&s;erve better of any of the A&s;&s;embly, then to be thought their Retarders or limetwigs.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Here you make as if I &s;pake without due re&s;pect, or rather with termes of reproach unto the State or Parliament, for bringing in the Government as <HI>fluttering upon the limetwigge at We&s;t|min&s;ter;</HI> and thereupon you &s;ay, <HI>Sure the State or Parliament may de&s;erve better of any of the A&s;&s;embly then to be thought their Retar|ders or limetwigs:</HI> and you &s;trive to &s;traine up the words to an higher degree of guilt, by an aggravation of ingratitude, in that they have honoured them above their Brethren.</P>
<P>To which I an&s;wer: Fir&s;t, that my words, Sect. 9. p. 26. are the&s;e; <HI>It hath been, if not the fault, yet the ill hap of our Church and State, to have the Government fluttering upon the limetwig of deliberation at</HI> We&s;tmin&s;ter, <HI>when it &s;hould be upon the wing of actuall execu|tion all over the Kingdome.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, that if I had mi&s;taken termes of diminution of the dignitie of the Parliament, for termes of honour, and gratefull ac|knowledgement,
<PB N="44" REF="38">there is no rea&s;on that for my fault the A&s;&s;em|bly &s;hould be involved in the imputation of an offence; &s;ince I did not write by any either command from them, or con&s;ultation with them.</P>
<P>Thirdly, confining the charge to my &s;elfe, I may challenge you for a fayling in charity, and memorie. Fir&s;t, <HI>in charitie,</HI> in that you make &s;o ill a con&s;truction of my words both <HI>really,</HI> and <HI>per|&s;onally; really</HI> interpreting the limetwig in a &s;ence of defilement, whereas I meant it onely as a let and impediment; (which may be|fall the deliberations of the be&s;t and wi&s;e&s;t men) and <HI>per&s;onally,</HI> in turning the terme upon the State or Parliament, in an offen&s;ive &s;ignification towards them, whom I never meant, nor mentioned with a thought or expre&s;&s;ion of di&s;paragement. Secondly, in <HI>me|mory,</HI> in that you forgate a precedent pa&s;&s;age in my Booke, which might (had you remembred it) have prevented &s;uch a &s;ini&s;ter &s;ur|mi&s;e of the metaphor I u&s;ed; my words which manife&s;tly hold out a confutation of your corrupt glo&s;&s;e on the&s;e now in que&s;tion, are the&s;e,</P>
<P><HI>Yet they cannot make that &s;peed with the Government which by mo&s;t is de&s;ired, and very much de&s;ired by them&s;elves (as we of the A&s;&s;embly can witne&s;&s;e who have often beene &s;ent to by that Honou|rable Senate to quicken our worke, and to ripen our debates to a full re&s;olution) becau&s;e as with us the libertie of &s;peaking (wherein e|very one is frce to propo&s;e and pro&s;ecute any doubt) prolonged the Go|vernment in our hands; &s;o the like libertie in the Honourable Hon|&s;es (or rather our libertie is like theirs, it being the prototypon) longthens the debates, and delayes the votes of that mo&s;t Honourable Senate; and &s;o much the more, becau&s;e they are more in number then we in our Synod, and becau&s;e their determinations are finall as ours are not.</HI></P>
<P>But when you have made the wor&s;t &s;ence you can of them, you come in with this allay; <HI>it may be you call your di&s;&s;enting Brethren the limetwigs.</HI> I doe not that neither, for I doe not &s;o confound per&s;ons and things as to meane men to be the limet wigs, but their deliberations, objections, and ob&s;tructions that &s;tep in, and keepe out deciding votes, and re&s;olutions of debates; wherein if I mean your Independent Brethren had their part, and fault, I doe them
<PB N="45" REF="38">no wrong; but then you make as if I wronged my &s;elfe, <HI>defiling my argument with a limetwigge and be wraying our &s;low procee|ding to have beene rather of con&s;traint then con&s;cience;</HI> which is a me are incon&s;equence, for we neither endeavoured, nor de&s;ired &s;uch a precipitation of conclu&s;ions as &s;hould not admit of nece&s;&s;ary or competent con&s;ideration, and di&s;cu&s;&s;ion beforchund; nor &s;uch a &s;lowne&s;&s;e of proceeding as &s;hould wiredraw a di&s;pute for a weeke or a fortnight, which would not have taken up one whole day, if there had not beene &s;ome &s;uch among us as<NOTE N="q" PLACE="marg"><HI>Rem planam argumentatione facere dubiam.</HI> Hieron. adver&s;. Ruffin. Tom. 2. operum p. 217.</NOTE> <HI>Hierome</HI> tax|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">th for <HI>cavilling a cleare truth into ab&s;curitie.</HI></P>
<P>And now I have cleared my &s;elfe of your imputation of di&s;re|&s;pect to the State, or Parliament, I may rooriminate &s;ome con|tempt in you towards that mo&s;t Honourable A&s;&s;embly.</P>
<P>For, Fir&s;t, you &s;eeme to thinke it a matter of prai&s;e to your partic, that<NOTE N="r" PLACE="marg">So in your Letter to me.</NOTE> <HI>you are more on the Magi&s;trates &s;ide then the Magi|&s;trate on yours;</HI> as if the Magi&s;trate were bound to tolerate your way again&s;t law, and the pence and union of Church and State, as much as you are bound to allow them their power, and authoritie for pre&s;ervation of the publicke welfare.</P>
<P>Secondly. In your <HI>de&s;igne for Pence,</HI> (as farre as you dare) you project a way to decline the Magi&s;trates Authoritie about reli|gious matters, which an advi&s;ed Reader may perceive, though your termes be very cunningly cho&s;en, and covertly couched to|gether, where you &s;ay,<NOTE N="&s;" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 4. nu. 13.</NOTE> <HI>Let not abo&s;e beleevers who have the ad|vantage of the Magi&s;trate, &s;triue to make any unwarrantable u&s;e of it one again&s;t another, becau&s;e Scripture principles are not &s;o cleare for it.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly, you for your part ca&s;t a notorious calumnie upon the Parliament; calling<NOTE N="t" PLACE="marg">Ibid. p. 25.</NOTE> <HI>the maint enance of the Mini&s;ters by Tythes undeniably Iewi&s;h and Popi&s;h,</HI> which are confirmed by Ordinance of Parliament, whereof you cannot be ignorant; and it cannot be avoided if Tythes be of that nature, but that you make the Parlia|ment Patrones of Iudai&s;me and Popery, and that is &s;uch a noto|rious reproach, as you &s;hould not have entertained in your mo&s;t &s;ecret thoughts, nor whi&s;pered in the care of any friend, much le&s;&s;e have proclaimed it in Print, in &s;uch peremptory termes as you have done.</P>
<PB N="46" REF="39">
<P>Fourthly, you give up the Magi&s;trates Authoritie to the peoples libertie, leaving it in their choice to receive, or refu&s;e Church-go|vernment, as they like or di&s;like it; for thus you would have it propounded unto them,<NOTE N="u" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 14.</NOTE> <HI>People, here is a Government, which to &s;ome of us &s;eemeth to be a government according to the Word of God, take it and examine it, if you be &s;o per&s;waded, and if the Word of God hold it forth clearely, embrace it; if not, doe not obey any thing in blinde and implicite obedience; this were faire dealing with con|&s;cience.</HI> But it were foule dealing with the Magi&s;trate, yea and the people too, for it would bring all to Anarchie and confu&s;ion, as <HI>Iudg.</HI> 17.6. If you &s;ay, you meane it in re&s;pect of the A&s;&s;embly or Mini&s;ters, they pre&s;ent it not to the people untill the Parlia|ment have ratified it by their Authoritie; and &s;o your meaning mu&s;t be, that they &s;hould put that to the peoples choice, which the Parliament hath concluded in their Votes, and impo&s;ed both on Mini&s;ters, and people by their civill Sanction; and what is this but to &s;ubject the Supreame Authority to the popular liberty?</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 44.</LABEL><HI>You &s;ay we gather out the wheat, it is well you ob&s;erve we have wheat among&s;t us, which &s;ome of your Brethren will &s;carce allow ut, and you very hardly.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Truly S^r. if you came truly by your wheat I would allow it you; but though I allow that you have wheat in fact, I &s;ay you have not that wheat in right, which you have gathered out of other Churches; for your gatherings are upon the grounds of <HI>Brow|ni&s;me,</HI> with injury and calumnie of the Churches from whence your covenanted members are collected.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="17" TYPE="section">
<PB N="47" REF="39">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XVII.</HI> The &s;ettling of Government fal&s;ly &s;ugge&s;ted to be hereticall, with an implicit reproach upon the Parliament. Of the truth of <HI>Sleidans</HI> &s;tory of the Anabapti&s;ts in Germany. A ra&s;h cen&s;ure of <HI>Luther,</HI> and the Lutherans in Germany for oppo&s;ing them. A caveat to England to take warning by Germany. The Mini|&s;ters practice &s;landered, and the Magi&s;trate di&s;honoured by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI></HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 45.</LABEL><HI>VVHether may not your &s;ettling things thus be as great an here&s;ie as you complaine again&s;t? Be &s;paring, you may call tho&s;e truths which you now call here&s;ies.</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">See the like. p. 13.</NOTE> Paul <HI>preached that Do|ctrine after, which before be de&s;troyed.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>What &s;ettling doe you meane? the debates, and votes, and ad|vice of the A&s;&s;embly to the Parliament, (which is all they doe) are no &s;ettlings of any thing; for when they are pre&s;ented to them, they come under their examination againe; but nothing is &s;ettled in Government, untill, after their di&s;cu&s;&s;ion and re&s;olu|tion, their civill Sanction be &s;et upon it; and how &s;hould this be an here&s;ie, as great an here&s;ie as we complaine of? we complain of all here&s;ies, what will be the con&s;equence of this implicit charge? can the Parliament &s;ettle here&s;ie and not be hereticks? nay wor&s;e then &s;o, for it is farre wor&s;e to &s;ettle an here&s;ie, and to authori&s;e it to &s;o many thou&s;ands as are under the power of the Parliament, then for any, or many particular per&s;ons to hold an here&s;ie. And whereas you intimate a change of my minde, &s;o farre as that I may be like, after the example of <HI>Paul,</HI> to <HI>preach for that Doctrine which now I de&s;troy,</HI> I tru&s;t (not in my &s;elfe, but in the &s;upport of Divine grace) that I &s;hall alwaies be &s;o farre op|&s;ite or adver&s;e unto you, untill you be &s;ettled, as to be con&s;tant to the truth I have beleeved, and profe&s;&s;ed, while you runne your &s;elfe giddy in the circle of erroneous, or hereticall opinions.</P>
<PB N="48" REF="40">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 46.</LABEL> <HI>To that of the Anabapti&s;ts and Sectaries quenched by</HI> Luthers <HI>mediation you &s;ay, I dave not beleeve your Hi&s;torian, nor take all again&s;t them from the Pen of an enemy. He that takes the Parlia|ments Batiels from an</HI> Oxford <HI>Pon, &s;hall reade nothing but rebellion rather them religion. And me thinkes I ob&s;erve much here in your ob&s;ervation to the contrary.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>You &s;ay you dare not beleeve my Hi&s;torian again&s;t the Anaba|pti&s;ts, more then an <HI>Oxford</HI> Pen concerning the Battels of the Parliament, from whence you &s;hall read nothing but <HI>Rebellion</HI> ra|ther then <HI>Religion;</HI> as if the warre of the Anabapti&s;ts were as warrantable as that of the Parliament, or <HI>Iohn Sleydan</HI> as con|temptible, and incredible a Writer as <HI>Mercurius Aulicus,</HI> or <HI>Mercurius Academicus;</HI> which makes me thinke you have not read <HI>Sleydan,</HI> for if you had, you would ob&s;erve and acknow|ledge in him as many <GAP DESC="foreign"> of a true Hi&s;torian as in mo&s;t, whe|ther of the ancient or latter Ages, and &s;o the mo&s;t judicious Pro|te&s;tants e&s;teeme of him; The Papi&s;ts I confe&s;&s;e undervalue him as you doe, and &s;ome of them<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Surius <HI>Pre|face in</HI> Ioh. Naucler. <HI>gene|rat.</HI> Beruard. Dorhof. Apodeix. <HI>Cal|vini&s;t. non e&s;&s;e Aug. Confe&s;. c. 4.</HI> Claud. Verderii Cen&s;iones. <HI>p. 8. b.</HI></NOTE> vilifie him, as if he partially in|clined to the <HI>Lutheran</HI> party again&s;t the <HI>Popi&s;h;</HI> yet &s;ome of them give him the prai&s;e of a good Hi&s;torian, as<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Joh. Bod. Method. hi&s;t. <HI>c. 6. p. 48, 49.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Iohn Bodine</HI> in his <HI>Method of hi&s;tory;</HI> and for the &s;tory of the Anabapti&s;ts and their fanatick fancies, and furious uprores, they are not onely re|corded by <HI>Sleydan,</HI> but by others, as by<NOTE N="c" PLACE="foot"><HI>Philip Lonicerus.</HI> Theatr. hi&s;t. p. 107, &amp;c.</NOTE> <HI>Philip Lonicerus,</HI> and by<NOTE N="d" PLACE="foot"><HI>Bulliuger</HI> ad|ver&s;us Anabapt. l. 2. c. 8, 9, 10, 11.</NOTE> <HI>Bullinger</HI> in his Booke again&s;t that Sect; by<NOTE N="e" PLACE="foot">Fred. Spanbemii Diatrib. Hi&s;tor. <HI>de Orig. progre&s;. &amp;c. Anabapti&s;t. in Appendice ad</HI> Clepenburgil Gangranam Anabapti&s;t. <HI>p. 386. &amp;c. where he citeth</HI> Luther, Melancthon, Zwingliut, Menius, <HI>&amp;</HI> Regius. <HI>Ibid. p. 393.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Spanhemius,</HI> by<NOTE N="f" PLACE="foot">Courad. Heresbach. I. C. hi&s;toria Anabapti&s;t. de factione Mona&s;terion&s;s <HI>anno 1534.</HI> ad Era&s;m. Roterod. Epi&s;t. forma <HI>an|no 1536.</HI> de&s;cript. excu&s;. Am&s;terdam. per Henricum Laurentium.</NOTE> <HI>Conradus Here&s;bachius,</HI><NOTE N="g" PLACE="foot">Theodor. Strachii hypom|nemat. &amp; notae in illam Epi&s;t. ei&s;dem loco &amp; anno excu&s;.</NOTE> <HI>Theodorus Strachius,</HI> and by<NOTE N="h" PLACE="foot">Lambert. Horten&s;. lib. tumult. Ans|bapt. <HI>anno 1548.</HI> Bafil. edit <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">.</NOTE> <HI>Lamber|tus Horten&s;ius.</HI></P>
<PB N="49" REF="40">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 46.</LABEL> <HI>We may rather thinke that</HI> Germany <HI>is a field of bloud to this day for &s;hedding the blood of &s;o many con&s;ciences for &s;ome points of diffe|rence, and for</HI> Luthers <HI>mediation again&s;t them: looke well and tell me how much the Lutherans there have advanced in the reformation, have they not rather &s;tood like</HI> Io&s;huahs <HI>Sunne where he left them?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>This againe &s;heweth that you have not read, or not well con|&s;idered of the principles and practices of the Anabapti&s;ts; which were &s;uch both again&s;t God and man, as could not con&s;i&s;t with the &s;afetie either of the Church or State; and therefore your cen&s;ure of the &s;inne and judgement of <HI>Germany,</HI> and of the <HI>Lu|therans,</HI> is a pre&s;umptuous perching into Gods Tribunall.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 46.</LABEL><HI>Let</HI> England <HI>take warning by</HI> Germany.</P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Good coun&s;ell I confe&s;&s;e, but not in your &s;ence, in favour of &s;uch Sects, or feare of oppo&s;ing their fancies, or &s;topping their proceedings; but let <HI>England</HI> take warning by <HI>Germany</HI> for being too indulgent to them, upon their illu&s;ive pretences of more il|lumination, and &s;pirituall communion with God, then other men enjoy.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 46.</LABEL><HI>Let your warfare be &s;pirituall, your weapons not carnall, put on the armour of light, and take them by a Gospel &s;iege, and we are &s;a|tisfied. But if you take them with the power of the Magi&s;trate, with &s;words and &s;taves as they tooke Chri&s;t; if you come in this Go&s;pel controver&s;ie to take them as the Parliament takes in their Towns and Cities, as your in&s;tance &s;eemer to imply, take heed left you <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">ed were &s;pirituall blood to that under the Altar, that <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> cea&s;es to cry, How long Lord, how long?</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="50" REF="41">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> If you &s;peake this to the Mini&s;ters, their warfare is none other then &s;pirituall; nor is the Magi&s;trate their mini&s;ter, to take Secta|ries with &s;words or &s;taves if their tran&s;gre&s;&s;ions de&s;erve it, &s;ince therein they doe their owne worke, whereto by their office they are obliged; and when they doe &s;o, you &s;hould not &s;o di&s;parage the Magi&s;trates as to match them with &s;uch wicked Officers as &s;et upon our ble&s;&s;ed Saviour, and with violent hands violated the Maje&s;tie and Piety of his Per&s;on; nor &s;o honour &s;uch hereticall Incendiaries, and &s;laughter men as tho&s;e Anabapti&s;ts were, as to compare them to Chri&s;t. And for your caveat again&s;t &s;hedding of <HI>&s;pirituall blood,</HI> if you meane by that phra&s;e the blood of Secta|ries, or Hereticks, whom &s;ome take to be more &s;pirituall then o|ther men, they are many of them very carnall Go&s;pellers; and if &s;pirituall, rather &s;uch as are led by a wicked &s;pirit, the &s;ugge&s;ter of hereticall untruths, and tempter to diabolicall bla&s;phemies, and outrages, then &s;uch as are guided by the Spirit of truth and holi|ne&s;&s;e: and if by <HI>&s;pirituall blood</HI> you meane (as the mo&s;t judicious commonly u&s;e and under&s;tand the phra&s;e) the blood of &s;oules; it is that which ingageth the Magi&s;trates to repre&s;&s;e hereticall Teachers, for by drawing others to here&s;ie they are guilty of the <HI>blood of &s;oules;</HI> and they are all guilty of that blood who doe not all they can, according to their place and power, to prevent the &s;hedding of it by &s;educing Doctors; for zeale in this cau&s;e I have cited &s;ome lively and vigorous &s;ayings of the Ancients in my <HI>for|mer</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Sect. 12. p. 13.</NOTE> <HI>Book,</HI> to which I remit you.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 46.</LABEL><HI>So as you will have an hazard runne both in State and Church for a new experiment upon the Mini&s;ters; but &s;ure your Stati&s;ts will tell you it is not &s;afe trying experiments with States, they are too va&s;t bodies for that; what thinke you of that Phy&s;ician who will ca&s;t his Patient into a di&s;ea&s;e to trie a cure on him? you know the old morall Adage,</HI> Turpius ejicitur quam non admittitur ho&s;pes.</P></Q>
<PB N="51" REF="41">
<P><LABEL>light.</LABEL> To your exception <HI>we have not yet any experience of our new Clergie,</HI> my<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Examination of the New Querie. Sect. 10. p. 32.</NOTE> An&s;wer was, <HI>Then they cannot yet be charged with mi&s;government of the people; and how can there be experience of them, if there be no Government to try them withall? but we have experience of much evill for want of Government,</HI> as<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Ibid.</NOTE> I told you before. And for that you &s;ay, <HI>your Stati&s;ts will tell you it is not &s;afe trying experience with States,</HI> which you illu&s;trate by a &s;imilitude of a Phy&s;ician ca&s;ting his Patient into a di&s;ea&s;e to try a cure on him: I like it very well in tho&s;e, and being rightly applied it makes much again&s;t you, and the toleration you plead for, for we have found it by wofull experience, that &s;ome politick Mountebankes have made a perillous experiment upon our State by connivence at, and pre&s;&s;ing for a toleration of many erroneous, and &s;ome very hereticall Sects; the cure whereof the longer it is delayed will be more difficult and more dangerous to the &s;oules of the people, in whom errour and here&s;ie &s;pread, and eat like a canker, or gan|grene as in the Greeke, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.17.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="18" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XVIII.</HI> The Toleration de&s;ired by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> neither &s;afe nor &s;ound, oppo&s;ite to the minde of <HI>Paul, 1 Cor. 1.10. Gal. 5.10.12.</HI> Of the compa|ri&s;on of the two ambitious Brethren to ten more humble and moderate; The Pre&s;bytery not proved by Magi&s;trates, though approved by them; Of the pretended truth of Sectaries, and of the pre&s;cription of Bi&s;hops and Independents.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 47.</LABEL>I <HI>Would there were more &s;uch,</HI> (that is, &s;uch as would give full &s;cope and libertie to multiplicitie of &s;ects) <HI>I am &s;ure it is &s;a|fe&s;t, and &s;ounde&s;t; It is &s;afe&s;t, for there is no &s;uch danger in that of crucifying Chri&s;t in ignorance, or fighting again&s;t God; and &s;ound|e&s;t,
<PB N="52" REF="42">for &s;o they die out mo&s;t naturally by their owne un&s;oundne&s;&s;e, without noi&s;e and commotion.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In this you have delivered a mo&s;t un&s;afe, and un&s;ound para|dox, which is di&s;proved by the experience of former ages, and foraine parts; but mo&s;t of all by that of our owne Kingdome within the&s;e foure yeeres la&s;t pa&s;t: witne&s;&s;e M^r. <HI>Edwards</HI> his la&s;t Booke the <HI>Gangrene,</HI> which if you were &s;o unpatiall and patient, as to read without prejudice or pa&s;&s;ion, you could not patiently review your own writing in this particular.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 47.</LABEL><HI>Oppo&s;e with words, as</HI> Paul <HI>did, but not with &s;word, and turning the edge of authoritie again&s;t us.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>light.</LABEL> In this you are oppo&s;ite to <HI>Paul</HI> and your &s;elfe both; <HI>to Paul,</HI> who expre&s;&s;ely pre&s;&s;eth to union in minde, in judgement, in &s;peech; 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.10. and wi&s;heth them cut off who trouble the Church, <HI>Gal.</HI> 5.12. whereas you would have &s;ects to be left to them&s;elves: and <HI>to your &s;elfe;</HI> whereas before you would have them let <HI>alone, to die out mo&s;t naturally without noi&s;e,</HI> now you would have them oppo&s;ed with words, as <HI>Paul</HI> did; but can there be words of oppo&s;ition without any noi&s;e? And for that you &s;ay again&s;t the coercion or execution by the &s;word, it is impertinent|ly propo&s;ed to the Presbytery, who take not upon them to turne the edge of authoritie any way; and prejudiciall to the prudence and power of Magi&s;trates, as if they knew not when to u&s;e it, un|le&s;&s;e they were admoni&s;hed and moved by others unto it, or might not u&s;e it again&s;t di&s;turbers of the publique peace of Church and State.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 48.</LABEL><HI>But how came you by &s;uch plentie (as ten) of the better &s;ort for two of the wor&s;e?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>There meeds none other an&s;w, to this que&s;t. then to repeat your
<PB N="53" REF="42">words and mine aright: <HI>Your &s;elfe &s;aid</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">See my Exa|mination of the New Querie. Sect. 10. p. 34.</NOTE> <HI>I que&s;tion not but &s;ome Pre&s;byterians may be like the ten, yet there are others like the two brethren, who &s;trive who &s;hould be the greate&s;t.</HI> To which mine An|&s;wer is, <HI>If we keepe the proportion you brought in, and make applica|tion accordingly, we may &s;ay, for two ambitious Pre&s;byterians it is like there may be ten that are more mode&s;tly and humbly minded, then to affect &s;uch a preeminence above their brethren.</HI></P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 48.</LABEL><HI>Indeed you are able to prove by the Magi&s;trate that Pre&s;bytery is &s;ome of it Chri&s;ts way, that is an argument of power, not of Scri|pture.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>How farre the Presbyteriall government is Chri&s;ts way is &s;uf|ficiently &s;et forth by the forecited Authour, who hath profe&s;&s;edly handled it; but who I pray you offers to prove by the Magi&s;tracy that the Presbytery is Chri&s;ts way? they may prove it to the Ma|gi&s;trate, but to doe it by the Magi&s;trate, is neither undertaken, nor required by any.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 49.</LABEL><HI>We had rather be a few with truth, then a multitude again&s;t it.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>If that were your minde, you would rather clo&s;e with Pre&s;|byterians, whom you cannot deny to be &s;ound and Orthodox in all matters of faith, and godline&s;&s;e, then with &s;o many extrava|gant Sectaries, who are &s;o contradictory both to the Scripture, and to them&s;elves, in their oppo&s;ite Tenets, that there mu&s;t needs be very much untruth in their Tenets.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 50.</LABEL><HI>The Bi&s;hops had a better pre&s;cription even</HI> by Law <HI>for their Go|vernment then we:</HI> (i.) then Independents.</P>
<P><HI>But how is this? is a legall pre&s;cription better hold the a Gospel pre&s;cription?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In this and &s;ome lines next following you take that for granted,
<PB N="54" REF="43">which we cannot yeeld, nor can you ever prove, viz. that your In|dependency is purely Evangelicall; which if you can make good (but the Texts you have crowded together at the end of your <HI>opening of</HI> M^r. <HI>Prinnes Vindication</HI> will not doe it) you &s;hall make me of your Religion, when you let me know which it is you will choo&s;e, and &s;tand to when you have cho&s;en.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="19" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XIX.</HI> Of the pretended mode&s;ty and humilitie of the Independents, by way of compari&s;on with the Pre&s;byterians.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 50.</LABEL><HI>BVt there is one Government &s;et up already, a Civill, Parliamen|tary Government, and will you &s;et up another above that, or co|ordinate with it? will you &s;et up one government to rule another, or tutor another?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>And if your Independent Government were &s;et up, which you accompt <HI>an Evangelicall and Scripture Government, Chri&s;ts golden Scepter, Chri&s;t upon his Throne, &s;hould that Government be above the Civill Government,</HI> or <HI>coordinate with it?</HI> would you &s;et up this <HI>government to rule the other, or tutor the other?</HI> when you have an&s;wered the&s;e Queries put upon Independency, you will &s;ee it will not be difficult to an&s;wer the like concerning Presbyte|ry; yet it is evident to all that make any &s;erious ob&s;ervation on both wayes, that the Presbyteriall Government is more mode|rate, more &s;ubordinate to the Parliamentary Government then the Independent, becau&s;e that is humbly &s;ubmitted to the debate of the Parliament for approbation of it, and waiteth for their Ci|vill e&s;tabli&s;hment before any part of it is put into execution and practi&s;e, the Independent Government (in this re&s;pect Indepen|dent on the Parliament, as well as on Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall, and Nationall A&s;&s;emblies) comes under no &s;uch triall of them, but is &s;et up without any authoritie from them.</P>
<PB N="55" REF="43">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 50.</LABEL> <HI>And mu&s;t you needs &s;et up as large a dominion as the civill power hath? mu&s;t your Pre&s;bytery be as ample, as high, as &s;upreme as the Parliament? will no le&s;&s;e territory or kingdome &s;erve it, but all England, whole Nations? mu&s;t Chri&s;ts government be iu&s;t as long, as broad as the worlds?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Here is a great deale of aggravating Rhetoricke, to bring in a &s;u&s;picion of a va&s;t, and unlimited domination of the Presbytery; and I pray you, S^r, if Independency were the Parliaments dar|ling, as you de&s;ire it, would nor you wi&s;h it, and, if you could, pro|cure it to be &s;et up in every Citie and Towne in <HI>England?</HI> would not you that think it a good government, the be&s;t government, ad|vance your good opinion of it, &amp; well-wi&s;hings to it, according to the maxime, <HI>Bonum que communius, comelius?</HI> Every good thing the more common, the more commendable? We ob&s;erve your &s;e|dulitie in &s;preading your opinions into remote regions, and cannot but conceive, by your zeale and activitie for your cau&s;e, that you are ambitious, like the Spaniard, to enlarge your Religion, as he his Dominions; whereof<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Myraeus Com|ment. de bello Bohemic. p. <HI>7.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Myraeus</HI> &s;aith, that the Sunne never &s;ets, but alwayes &s;hines in &s;ome place or other where he raignes.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 50.</LABEL><HI>Now Reader iudge which government affects dominion? which brings in whole nations under the &s;cepter of it? poore Scripture go|vernment can be content to &s;it downe in a village; To the Church in thy hou&s;e, &s;aith the Spirit; in a Citie, as Corinth; and over but a few there, the Saints onely in fellow&s;hip; to the Church in Corinth, in a Countrey, not over a Countrey; To the &s;even Churches in A&s;ia, not of A&s;ia; not the Church of A&s;ia, or the Church A&s;ia, a Church taking in halfe part of the world.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>And let the Reader judge how much of roving fancie and fond affection, how little judgement is in this paragraph. <HI>Which Go|vernment, &s;ay you, affects dominion?</HI> &amp;c. &s;peake properly Sir, and the truth will better appeare, and be more ready for &s;entence and
<PB N="56" REF="44">judgement, and then your que&s;tion will be; <HI>which &s;ort of tho&s;e that &s;tand for Government</HI> (for the government as ab&s;tracted from them hath no affections at all) <HI>affect dominion</HI> more? You &s;ay <HI>poore Scripture government can be content to &s;it down in a village, to the Church in thy hou&s;e,</HI> &amp;c. where you a&s;&s;ume and pre&s;uppo&s;e (which I deny) that Independency is a government either poore or pure according to the Scriptures. And for Independent Mini|&s;ters when you &s;ee them &s;o placed in the Citie, in the chiefe Citie of the Kingdome, culling out of mens charges the faire&s;t and fat|te&s;t of their flocks to be the materials and members of their new|gathered Churches, and &s;o ordering their Sermons, and covenant|ing with their hearers, that they have the mo&s;t populous congre|gations, all &s;ects coming to heare them, and adhering to them as to their Patrons, who will not come to the Sermons of the mo&s;t Orthodox and able Preachers of the Presbyteriall way;</P>
<P>When you know, or may know that mo&s;t of them are emi|nently richer then other Mini&s;ters, how can you, how dare you bragge of the humilitie, and povertie of Independency &s;itting down contented with a village? e&s;pecially, when none of tho&s;e who &s;et up Independency in <HI>England</HI> planted them&s;elves in a vil|lage, except in vicinitie to &s;ome great Citie where they might have the profit, and comfort, and the be&s;t accommodations of Ci|tie and Countrey?</P>
<P>And for the &s;mall Church <HI>in a hou&s;e,</HI> or a particular Citie, <HI>in a Countrey, not over a Countrey, in A&s;ia, not the Church of A&s;ia;</HI> This makes no more for Independency then for Presbytery, when there were too few profe&s;&s;ing the faith to be &s;orted into Con|gregations Cla&s;&s;icall, Provinciall and Nationall A&s;&s;emblies; and &s;o your in&s;tance cannot be a fit patterne for the&s;e times, wherein the profe&s;&s;ion of the Go&s;pel is received all over the Kingdome.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="20" TYPE="section">
<PB N="57" REF="44">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XX.</HI> Whether Chri&s;t, if he would have a nationall comprehen&s;ive Church, was bound to have begun the practi&s;e of it over whole Kingdomes, as <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> &s;aith; and whether importeth more pride, to de&s;ire a &s;ubordination of A&s;&s;emblies, Parochiall, Cla&s;&s;icall, &amp;c. then to be adver&s;e to it.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 50, 51.</LABEL><HI>SVre if Chri&s;t would have had &s;uch a nationall comprehen&s;ive Church, he would have converted Kings and Princes fir&s;t, and they &s;hould have given up their Kingdomes to Ie&s;us Chri&s;t in the way of a Pre&s;byterian.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>To this I oppo&s;e your own words, both in your<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>New Querie</HI> repeated in my <HI>Examination.</HI> Sect. 12. p. 38.</NOTE> <HI>Querie</HI> and in your <HI>Smoke,</HI> in both which places, you tell your Reader that the publication of the Go&s;pel and the propo&s;all of Church govern|ment were brought in at di&s;tance: <HI>here&s;ies,</HI> &s;ay you, <HI>might have growne from</HI> Iohns <HI>fir&s;t Sermon to</HI> Pauls <HI>Epi&s;tles, and the &s;ending of the Spirit, but you &s;ee there was no government &s;etled till afterwards upon the people of Gods</HI> and in your la&s;t you tell me, that<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke.</HI> p. 54.</NOTE> <HI>you &s;hew|ed me that no government began with the Go&s;pel manife&s;tation, by which (&s;ay you) I made it appeare, that if government had been of &s;uch morall nece&s;&s;itie, why was it not given out with the Go&s;pels fir&s;t giving out?</HI></P>
<P>Albeit then the Go&s;pel began not with the conver&s;ion of Kings and whole Kingdomes, yet the progre&s;&s;e of it hath been &s;o pro&s;pe|rous as to prevaile &s;o farre, and with the extent of it, may the go|vernment of the Go&s;pel be extended al&s;o, and it may be &s;et up after it, by your own confe&s;&s;ion rather then with it.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 51.</LABEL><HI>Nay it ought to have been &s;o, Ie&s;us Chri&s;t was bound in the way of righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e, to have begun the practice and modell to us over whole Kingdomes, having not left it in precept in the whole Go&s;pel; and we ought either to have practice or precept to order and command us in what we obey.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="58" REF="45">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> What? ought Chri&s;t, or was he bound in the way of righteou&s;|ne&s;&s;e to begin the Go&s;pel with conver&s;ion of Kings, and whole Kingdomes, if he meant to have &s;uch a <HI>Nationall and comprehen|&s;ive Church</HI> as the Presbyterians plead for? was he not free to be|gin the publication of it where he plea&s;ed, in the wilderne&s;&s;e of Iudea, rather then in the Citie Ieru&s;alem? and to whom he plea|&s;ed, to Shepheards in the field, rather then to <HI>Augu&s;tus</HI> in the Court?</P>
<P>If it had begun there; <HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> It might have been &s;u&s;pected as a Politicke devi&s;e, like that which<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Machiav. disp. lib. <HI>1.</HI> cap. <HI>11.</HI> p. <HI>63.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Machiavel</HI> commends in <HI>Ro|mulus</HI> and <HI>Numa,</HI> &s;etting up religion by fained revelation.</P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> Then the Doctrine of the Go&s;pel, condemned as fol|ly by &s;upercilious and &s;ecular wi&s;e men, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.23. had not ap|peared &s;o wi&s;e and powerfull as it was, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 18, 19, 20. of the &s;ame Chapter; nor,</P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> Had it had &s;o many illu&s;trious confirmations, both by miracles, and martyrdomes, as we find upon record both in the Scriptures, and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Hi&s;tories.</P>
<P>And was it not in his own choice to make his own pace for the proceeding both of Go&s;pel and Government? If you will &s;o con|fine Chri&s;t to your wayes of working, you make him Dependent, while you claime an Independent priviledge to your &s;elfe.</P>
<P>And for that you &s;ay, <HI>for practice or precept, to order and com|mand us in what we obey,</HI> we have both in the <HI>Go&s;pels</HI> of our Savi|our, and <HI>Epi&s;tles</HI> of the Apo&s;tles, and the Hi&s;tory of their <HI>Acts,</HI> (according to which the A&s;&s;embly have given up their advice to the Parliament) warrant for Church Government, and &s;o we hope it will come down from them by a Parliamentary approba|tion, and con&s;titution for the e&s;tabli&s;hment thereof throughout the whole Kingdome. And yet is not the Presbyteriall Govern|ment more ambitious, or domineering then the Independent; Nay, let the Indifferent Reader ob&s;erve, and con&s;ider the diffe|rence, and let him then re&s;olve, whether the Presbyterian or In|dependent be more affected to preeminence, or more willing to come under rule and government.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, The Presbyterians carne&s;tly de&s;ire the union, whereto
<PB N="59" REF="45">the Apo&s;tle emphatically exhorteth the Chri&s;tian <HI>Corinthians;</HI> Now <HI>I be&s;eech you brethren, by the Name of our Lord Ie&s;us Chri&s;t, that ye all &s;peake the &s;ame thing, and that there be no divi&s;ions among you, but that ye be perfectly ioyned together in the &s;ame minde and in the &s;ame iudgement,</HI> 1 Cor. 1.10.</P>
<P>Secondly, This union cannot be without a rule of con&s;ent; the rule of con&s;ent cannot be of any force, unle&s;&s;e it have the power and obligation of a law; this law requireth, as well &s;ubordination, as union; and this &s;ubordination is agreeable not onely to rea&s;on, but to Religion and Scripture, for <HI>the &s;pirits of the Prophets are &s;ubiect to the Prophets,</HI> 1 Cor. 14.32.</P>
<P>Thirdly, The Presbyterians, who yeeld to this &s;ubordination, e&s;pecially to the Superiour A&s;&s;emblies, not knowing, and the mo&s;t of them not expecting to be members either of Provinciall, or Nationall A&s;&s;emblies, doe all of them in their allowance of gra|duall appeales &s;ubmit them&s;elves to the con&s;ures of others, which is an act not of dominion, but of &s;ubjection. But the Independents will be as diffu&s;ive in their Church-way, and grow on from Cities to Countries, from Countries to Kingdomes, and will be like lit|tle Kings, or Free States in their own Congregations, and will ad|mit of no &s;ubordination, or &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;embly what&s;oever, though there be many ca&s;es which reach, beyond the limits of their covenanted meetings, to occa&s;ions of common concernment to many Churches; yea &s;ome of them are &s;o comprehen&s;ive, as to belong to all the Churches of a King|dome, which can neither be &s;ufficiently con&s;idered, nor ordered for the generall good, without a more generall convention and con&s;ultation of Church governours.</P>
<P>The Pope, though hated and &s;corned by you as an Antichri&s;tian <HI>Caiaphas,</HI> is a great, and I may &s;ay the &s;upreme Independent in the Chri&s;tian world; and his Independencie con&s;i&s;teth in this, that he will be judged of none; and herein truly S^r. you &s;ymbolize too much with the Papall ambition; in that as much as you can you free your &s;elves from all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall &s;ubjection; and this be|ing a chief part of his Antichri&s;tian exaltation, Independencie is rather Antichri&s;tian, then Presbyterie.</P>
<P>There is another part of the Papall pride, which is to require
<PB N="60" REF="46">that all be &s;ubject unto him that he may cen&s;ure and judge of all; and if I &s;hould &s;traine your words, as you &s;ometimes doe mine. I &s;hould &s;ay you are flown &s;o high in your fancie, as to be got a|bove the high pitch of the Popes Mitre; for he tooke not upon him to judge, or give lawes to Chri&s;t (though to all Chri&s;tians) as you doe, where you &s;ay <HI>that Chri&s;t ought, and was bound in the way of righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e to have begun the practi&s;e and modell to us over whole Kingdomes, &amp;c.</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="21" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXI. M^r. Saltm.</HI> his mi&s;take touching the building of the Temple. Of the difference of the patterne of the Temple and the patterne of the Government of the Gospel. <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> confu&s;edly jumbleth them together.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 52.</LABEL><HI>TO the difference I made of the materiall and Gospel patterne you &s;ay nothing, and that is the onely con&s;iderable. It may be, as you &s;aid of me, you are be&s;t able to deale with the other.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>I confe&s;&s;e I pa&s;&s;ed over &s;omewhat in your Quere, more in your la&s;t Booke, but nothing in either wherein I conceived there was any thing of weight, or pertinencie to the cau&s;e in difference be|twixt us. Yet to that difference<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Sect. 11. p. 37.</NOTE> I &s;aid &s;omething in its proper place, and<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Sect. 5. p. 16, 17.</NOTE> referred you to another Section where I ob&s;erved more differences then you brought in; and whether I owe you any thing for that particular, the Reader &s;hall judge; and if he find I was in your debt, he &s;hall &s;ee I &s;hall make ready payment of what is behinde; and it may be by that time I have done with your objection, you will thinke it better you had taken no notice of this omi&s;&s;ion, then occa&s;ioned me to make &s;uch an amends for it as now I mu&s;t doe.</P>
<P>In the la&s;t lea&s;e of your Quere, when you had brought in your
<PB N="61" REF="46">rea&s;ons for retarding the Governement, you bring in two <HI>objecti|ons,</HI> and make An&s;wers to them; the former is this,<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">New Quere. p. 7. Ob. 1.</NOTE> <HI>But the Temple was builded with all &s;peed in</HI> Nehemiahs <HI>time,</HI> and Haggai <HI>cals to the building, Is it time, &amp;c.</HI> Hag. 1.4.</P>
<P>Before I bring in my Reply to your An&s;wer, I mu&s;t minde you of a mi&s;take in your &s;ingle &s;heet; which though it be but &s;hort is lyable to a very ju&s;t exception for an errour in Story; and you &s;hould have heard of it &s;ooner from me, but that I ob&s;erved it not my &s;elfe untill I found I was mi&s;guided by your allegation; for I tooke it upon tru&s;t from you, becau&s;e I did not &s;u&s;pect you would mi&s;alledge any thing, which did no way conduce unto your cau&s;e, as the time of the building of the Temple doth not; now though the errour were originally yours, the correction may be mine, which you may better receive from me, then I might take mi&s;pri|&s;ion from you; you &s;ay the Temple was built in <HI>Nehemiahs</HI> time, but the truth is it was not, as you affirme, built in, but before <HI>Nehemiahs</HI> time, for the foundation of it was laide in the &s;econd yeare of <HI>Darius,</HI> Hag. 2.10.17. <HI>(i.)</HI> in the yeere of the world 3452. 519 yeers before the Incarnation of Chri&s;t; and it was fini&s;hed in the &s;ixth yeere of <HI>Darius,</HI> Ezra 6.15. that is, in the yeare of the world 3456. 515 yeers before Chri&s;ts Incarnation; but that building of <HI>Nehemiah</HI> was the building of the wals of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> Nehem. 2.17, 18, 19. and this was in the yeere of the world, 3527. about 444. yeeres before the birth of the Me&s;&s;ias; this worke about the wals was a worke but of 52. dayes, <HI>Nehem,</HI> 6.15. the former about the Temple la&s;ted about 4. yeeres, as from the Scriptures forealledged may be inferred.</P>
<P>Now for your An&s;wer it is this, <HI>Yea but the materiall patterne was more clearely left, and knowne then the Gospel patternes, the other were more in the letter, and the&s;e more in the &s;pirit; now there mu&s;t be a proving of all things, el&s;e there may be more ha&s;te then good &s;peed, as the Temple may be built by a fal&s;e patterne as well as by a true; and then better no building then no right Cedar to build withall.</HI></P>
<P>This is all for which you challenge my &s;ilence; and whereas you intimate &s;ome &s;oliditie in it, which I was not &s;o well able to deale with, as with the other part of your An&s;wer: Truly S^r.
<PB N="62" REF="47">I neither had, nor have any &s;uch opinion of it; it &s;eemed to me at fir&s;t, and it doth &s;o now upon the review, to be an intricate, per|plexed, and confu&s;ed jumbling of Metaphoricall, and literall ex|pre&s;&s;ions together; and not more darke for lack of light, then weake for want of &s;trength to that purpo&s;e for which it was framed: and therefore I thought it more fit for a tacit preterition, then for an expre&s;&s;e examination. But if you will have this rather, you &s;hall have it; and &s;o I &s;ay unto it,</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, that if the patterne were more cleare for building the Temple, then the Go&s;pel patterne for the &s;etting up of a Church-Government, why are you &s;o confident, and peremptory, and punctuall for your Go&s;pel patterne?</P>
<P>Secondly, Why tell you us of Go&s;pel patterns in the plurall number? is there any more then one patterne of Government in the Go&s;pel? if &s;o, though the Independent patterne be yeelded to be a Go&s;pel patterne, (which cannot be proved) the Presby|terian may be &s;o too, for if there be more then one, that rather then any other may be allowed to be another.</P>
<P>Thirdly, when you &s;ay the other were more in the letter, the&s;e more in the &s;pirit, what is your meaning by the&s;e words? were there more formes and patternes of the Temple then one? if there were, why doe you not &s;peake more clearely to the point of difference, betwixt them? if not, why &s;ay you <HI>they were more in the letter?</HI> and when you &s;ay the&s;e Go&s;pel patterns are more in the &s;pirit; I would know whether they be written, or not written; if they be written, they are as much in the letter as the other; if they be not written, how can you tell they be Go&s;pel patterns?</P>
<P>Fourthly, whereas you &s;ay, <HI>The Temple may be builded by a fal&s;e patterne,</HI> if you meane it of the materiall Temple, you deny the clearene&s;&s;e of the patterne which before you profe&s;&s;ed. And,</P>
<P>Fifthly, When you &s;ay, <HI>The Temple may be builded by a fal&s;e pat|terne, as well as by a true,</HI> if you meane it of the materiall Temple in <HI>Ezra's</HI> time, what is that to the Go&s;pel Government, in, or &s;ince our Saviours time? or if any thing, it is to contradict your &s;elfe, who make the Temple patterne &s;o cleare that there is no danger of a fal&s;e patterne of mi&s;guidance. If you meane it of the
<PB N="63" REF="47">Government of the Go&s;pel, why doe you &s;o confound what in the beginning of your An&s;wer to the Objection you pretend to di&s;tingui&s;h, to wit, the materiall Temple and the Evangeli|call order of the Church?</P>
<P>La&s;tly, whereas you &s;ay, <HI>Better no building at all then no right Cedar to build withall,</HI> what's your meaning by this metaphor? Cedar was the matter to build with, not the patterne whereby the building was to be formed, and &s;et together; which was the thing, whereof you would make the Reader beleeve you made a fit compari&s;on, and &s;hewed a materiall difference why the buil|ding of the Temple might be ha&s;tened in <HI>Ezra's</HI> time, and yet the &s;etting up of Government &s;hould be delayed in our time; for which you have &s;aid nothing either to declare, or a&s;&s;ure what you tooke upon you to illu&s;trate, and make good unto your Rea|der, whom I require now againe to judge betwixt us, whether this pa&s;&s;age of your Quere were not better omitted by me, then remembred by you, to put me to make &s;uch an An&s;wer unto it as I have done.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="22" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXII.</HI> Of &s;taying for the Spirit to give light of in&s;truction to the reformation of the Church.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 52.</LABEL><HI>IS not that a very Gospel way to &s;tay for the Spirits coming into the &s;ervants of the Lord? take heed of denying inspired di&s;ciples, you know it is a part of the fulfilling of the great Prophecie,</HI> Act. 2. <HI>Indeed &s;ome of the Prelates, many of them being uninspired them|&s;elves, and having little of the &s;pirit or none, would needs &s;ay there|fore that all inspirations and &s;pirituall inlightnings, were ended in the Church, becau&s;e ended in them; and becau&s;e they were &s;o carnall them&s;elves, they thought none was &s;pirituall; and you remember how they made lawes even again&s;t the &s;pirit in prayer.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="64" REF="48">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> Fir&s;t, I confe&s;&s;e it is a Go&s;pel way to &s;tay for the &s;pirits com|ing into the &s;ervants of the Lord; the Apo&s;tles were commanded by our Saviour not to depart from <HI>Ieru&s;alem,</HI> but to waite there for the promi&s;e of the Father, <HI>Act.</HI> 1.4. and they did &s;o, and there the Holy Gho&s;t came upon them, <HI>Act.</HI> 2.3. And &s;o the Prophecy of <HI>Ioel</HI> of pouring out the &s;pirit in the la&s;t dayes, <HI>Ioel</HI> 2.28. was fulfilled, and is &s;o implied by <HI>Peter,</HI> Act. 2. ver&s;. 16, 17.</P>
<P>Secondly, by the la&s;t dayes is not to be under&s;tood our pre&s;ent Age, 1645 yeers after our Saviours fir&s;t coming, and God knows how many before his &s;econd coming; by <HI>the la&s;t dayes</HI> may be un|der&s;tood not preci&s;ely tho&s;e which are next to the worlds end, but after times; as in the prophecie of <HI>Iacob,</HI> Gen. 19.1. which &s;ome|times may be further, as in that of <HI>Iacob</HI> and <HI>Ioel,</HI> &s;ometimes neerer hand, as the Prophecie of <HI>Peter</HI> that there &s;hould <HI>come in the la&s;t dayes &s;coffers,</HI> 2 Pet. 2.3. which was fulfilled, and &s;o is re|corded in the la&s;t of the Apo&s;tolicall Epi&s;tles, for in the 17. &amp; 18. ver&s;es of <HI>Iudes</HI> Epi&s;tle, &s;aith he, <HI>Beloved remember the words which were &s;poken before of the Apo&s;tles of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, how that they told you there &s;hould be mockers in the la&s;t times, who &s;hould walke after their owne ungodly lu&s;ts;</HI> but the dayes of the Go&s;pel are called the <HI>la&s;t times,</HI> becau&s;e after that is brought forth we mu&s;t looke for no more changes of Religion, and the manner of Gods wor&s;hip, as there was before in <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> time from what was in u&s;e before with the Patriarchs, and &s;ince Chri&s;ts time from the Ceremonials of <HI>Mo&s;es.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly, though I doe not nor dare put limits to the Spirit, which is free as the winde that bloweth where it li&s;teth, <HI>Ioh.</HI> 3.8. and doe acknowledge and ble&s;&s;e God for it that there is <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> &s;pirit of grace and &s;upplications,</HI> Zach. 1<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">.10. <HI>poured out</HI> upon many of Gods people; and not onely upon Preachers, but al&s;o upon divers others which are not: and that it was a wicked part in divers of the Prelates (for all on my knowledge were not guilty of it) to &s;tint the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, as they did by the <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> forme in their Conan, which was rather a bidding invitation to prayer, then a prayer it &s;olfe.</P>
<P>Yet fourthly, &s;ince the Apo&s;tle <HI>Paul</HI> foretels of the later times,
<PB N="65" REF="48">that there &s;hall be <HI><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> &s;pirits,</HI> and <HI>dectrines of Devils, &s;peaking lyes in hypocri&s;ie,</HI> 1 Tin<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">. 4.1.12. and <HI>John</HI> the Apo&s;tle gives a ca|veat again&s;t credulity in this ca&s;e, <HI>Beloved, beleeve not every &s;pirit, but try the &s;pirits whether they be of God,</HI> 1 Ioh. 4.1. and that Chri|&s;tians are admoni&s;hed <HI>to try all things,</HI> 1 The&s;. 5.21. and the Church of <HI>Ephe&s;us</HI> is commended for <HI>trying tho&s;e who &s;aid they were Apo|&s;tles and were not, and found them lyors,</HI> Revel. 2.2. and the tryall is to be made <HI>by the law,</HI> and <HI>by the te&s;timonie</HI> of the Scripture; and if they <HI>&s;peake not according to this, it is becau&s;e there is no light in them,</HI> E&s;a. 20.8. And &s;ince I have read of many horrid and abomi|nable things committed upon pretence of revelation of the &s;pirit;</P>
<P>La&s;tly, &s;ince the Government of the Church is not a matter of private in&s;piration, but of publique direction, and u&s;e to the whole Church, and that the Word of God, as a &s;tanding ru<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">e, is to give us directions in Go&s;pel di&s;pen&s;ations, I dare not expect where that &s;peakes nothing, that the defect will be made out, or made up with the whi&s;perings of a private &s;pir&s;t, e&s;pecially again&s;t the con|current judgement of the mo&s;t Orthodox Divines of the Refor|med Churches.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="23" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXIII.</HI> Of expedition or delay in &s;etting up of Government; Whether <HI>Mo|&s;es</HI> and <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> the Iewi&s;h and Chri&s;tian &s;tate be &s;o contrary, that there is no conformity betweene them.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 54.</LABEL><HI>ANd now after all this di&s;cour&s;e and ravelings out of time from</HI> Iohns <HI>Sermon, &amp;c. what have you gained, not that the Govern|ment was &s;o one <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> the<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> you have proved much to my advan|tage, and a clourer and fuller computation then I did the contrary; &s;o as you have beene taking &s;ome learned paines, if you well ob&s;erve, and the Reader will ob&s;erve you, to prove that the Government as fir&s;t was not &s;uddenly ca&s;t into a <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word">, or brought forth in practice,
<PB N="66" REF="49">which is the very thing I aimed at: and truly your paines in it have beene more then mine, and I thanke you for it.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>I mu&s;t recall you to our former entercour&s;e to give light for the clearing this exception;<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">New Quere. p. 7.</NOTE> you bring in a &s;econd Objection again&s;t the delay of it thus: <HI>But vica, bere&s;ies and &s;ehi&s;mes grew too fa&s;t,</HI> and you an&s;wer it thus:<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Ibid. p. 8.</NOTE> <HI>&s;o they might have done from</HI> Iohns <HI>fir&s;t Sermon to</HI> Pauls <HI>Epi&s;tles, and the &s;ending of the Spirit, but yet you &s;ee there was no Government till after &s;ettled upon the people of God.</HI> And not &s;hewing how long after, I calculated the time for you; and you are plea&s;ed in the end of the precedent Paragraph to <HI>com|mend my paines as more exact then yours, and to thanke me for it;</HI> but yet withall you make as if I had ravelled into time to prove your Tenet again&s;t mine own, wherein I &s;hall ea&s;ily di&s;prove you. For you brought in the putting off the government from <HI>Iohn Bapti&s;ts</HI> time untill <HI>Pauls</HI> Epi&s;tles, and the &s;ending of the Spirit; (where you confu&s;edly &s;huffle things together, which &s;hould be carefully di&s;tingui&s;hed) and if you meane it of the time from<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">See mine Ex|amin. of the New Quere. p. 39.</NOTE> <HI>Iohns</HI> preaching to the pouring out of the Spirit at the Fea&s;t of Penteco&s;t, it is but five yeares; if to the fir&s;t of <HI>Pauls</HI> Epi&s;tles, but 21; if to the la&s;t, 29 yeares; and before the end of that Epi&s;tle that Government was written which we finde in Scripture. Now take which of the&s;e times you will, and compare it to our time and State, and it will not &s;erve for any cau&s;e or ground of adjourn|ment, or putting off the Church Government to a further Date, as you would have it.</P>
<P>For, if that Government which the Scripture hath laid down be offered to acceptation, and e&s;tabli&s;hment, &s;hall we take 29 yeares time, or 21 yeares time, or 5 yeares time before we will admit of it? e&s;pecially &s;ince we have been for many yeares toge|ther conver&s;ant in the Scriptures, where it is founded, and have had the practice of it exemplified unto us in many Reformed Churches for 100 yeares together; &s;o that though 5, or 21, or 29 yeares, were to be taken for a long time in re&s;pect of the fir&s;t age of the Church, before the government of it was &s;etled upon the people of God, (and yet it was but a while, the progre&s;&s;e of the
<PB N="67" REF="49">Go&s;pel duely weighed) it makes nothing for the delay of Go|vernment you drive at: and &s;o di&s;appointing your purpo&s;e, which was out of that in&s;tance to make &s;ome &s;hew for the &s;lackne&s;&s;e in Government which you de&s;ire, I pleaded not your cau&s;e, but the truths, and mine own in pro&s;ecution of it again&s;t your exception. I &s;hall be willing in &s;ome other way to doe you a courte&s;ie, and to de&s;erve your thankes, but expect not I &s;hould be &s;o unfaithfull, or fickle, or &s;imple, as to de&s;ert the defence I have undertaken, or &s;o to manage it, as to give mine adver&s;ary advantage by it.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 55.</LABEL><HI>For that of old</HI> Elyes <HI>indulgence which you &s;peake <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word">, you are &s;till looking upon</HI> Mo&s;es, <HI>though you tell us of Chri&s;t; make the King|dome of I&s;rael and of England the &s;ame, a Iewi&s;h and a Chri&s;tian State the &s;ame, and then we &s;hall allow you both</HI> Elyes <HI>&s;inne, and his &s;onnes maintenance by tythes and offerings.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Having cited the example of old <HI>Ely,</HI> again&s;t indulgence to &s;uch as reproach and &s;candalize Religion, e&s;pecially again&s;t tolera|tion of bla&s;phemers, as <HI>Paul Be&s;t,</HI> who made bla&s;phemous ver&s;es again&s;t the Trinitie; you tell me, <HI>I am &s;till looking upon</HI> Mo&s;es, <HI>though I tell you of Chri&s;t;</HI> you meane by like that I am &s;till upon mine Annotations on the Pentateuch, but they are printed a good while &s;ince; and I doe not thinke you have often found me look|ing upon <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> &s;ince I had occa&s;ion to looke upon you as an ad|ver&s;ary; but if you looked upon him oftner, and under&s;tood him better, I beleeve you would be a more &s;ound and Orthodox Di|vine then as yet I can accompt you.</P>
<P>It is the manner of the <HI>Antinomians</HI> (of who&s;e impious and pernicious opinions, &s;ome of your writings have a &s;trong &s;avour) to &s;hew their &s;lightings of <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> upon all occa&s;ions; But Sir, though his Ceremonials be aboli&s;hed, his Indicials not e&s;tabli&s;hed in Chri&s;tian Common-wealths, (yet for &s;ome penall lawes, I thinke we &s;hould be better governed if they were more Mo&s;ai|call) yet his face &s;till &s;hines, and &s;hall doe to the end of the world, in the pietie, equitie, regularitie, and utilitie of the Morall Law, which he brought from the Mount.</P>
<PB N="68" REF="50">
<P>After your reproofe of me you appoint me a taske, and make me a promi&s;e; the <HI>taske</HI> is, that <HI>I mu&s;t make the Kingdome of I&s;|rael and of England the &s;ame, a Iewi&s;h and a Chri&s;tian State the &s;ame;</HI> Why I pray you, Sir, mu&s;t I make them all one, becau&s;e I bring an example of Caution out of the Old Te&s;tament? neither upon that ground, nor your command doe I finde my &s;elfe obliged to &s;uch an undertaking; nor is it any mans worke &s;o to compare or re&s;emble them as to make them the &s;ame, &s;ince they doe, and of nece&s;&s;itie mu&s;t differ in many things; and though they differ much, yet in divers things they do agree likewi&s;e, as the Apo&s;tle &s;heweth in part, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.1, 2, 3; 4. and that their &s;innes and pu|ni&s;hments &s;hould be warnings to us (for which purpo&s;e I cited old <HI>Elyes</HI> ca&s;e) he &s;heweth by many examples out of the Old Te&s;tament, from <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 5. to the 11; was it the Apo&s;tles dutie (ha|ving &s;o done) to undertake a proofe of the paritle or identitie of the Corinthian or Chri&s;tian and the Iewi&s;h State?</P>
<P>Now if I make good this, you promi&s;e <HI>to allow me both</HI> Elyes <HI>&s;inne, and his &s;onnes maintenance by tythes and offerings;</HI> but I will not take you at your word, for this liberall offer; keep <HI>Elyes</HI> &s;inne to your &s;elfe if you plea&s;e; and &s;ince I know you are di&s;plea&s;ed with Tythes, put them upon me, and I will either prove them lawfull, and I thinke I have done it already; or give them up as you have done.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="24" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXIIII.</HI> Truth not to be parted with for peace, the Magi&s;trate di&s;honoured, and the Pre&s;byterians &s;landered by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI></HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 55.</LABEL><HI>YOu would prove truth to be pretious to the di&s;advantage of peace, and therefore you bring in the Fathers again&s;t the Arri|ans, and no again&s;t the Papi&s;ts, and Chri&s;t again&s;t Peace; but what, would you prove that truth ought to be e&s;tabli&s;hed again&s;t peace, and peace to be no way to truth? &s;urely, truth and peace doe meet toge|ther, nay they are &s;o much one, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> there is even a truth in peace.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="69" REF="50">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> In your exception again&s;t the example of <HI>Ely;</HI> you play the <HI>Antinomian,</HI> in this and the next en&s;uing paragraph you take up the Tenet of the <HI>Anabapti&s;ts</HI> again&s;t the lawfulne&s;&s;e of warre, though not theirs onely, for &s;ome of the Fathers, and &s;ome famous Papi&s;ts have been of that opinion, but I finde you not much ver&s;ed in the writings of the Fathers, and very aver&s;e from the opinions of the Papi&s;ts, and but too kinde and complying in conceipt with <HI>Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> therefore I &s;uppo&s;e a &s;ymbolizing rather with them then with either of the other Sects; whereto I would make a returne, and that returne &s;hould be a refutation of that fancy, but that I have done it in print already, in<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>In my Ser|mon of the</HI> Fu|ry of warre and folly of &s;inne, p. <HI>10.</HI> ad <HI>15.</HI></NOTE> my <HI>Sermon</HI> before the Honourable Hou&s;e of Commons, <HI>April.</HI> 26. 1645.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 56.</LABEL><HI>You &s;ay there will be worke for the Magi&s;trate enough to puni&s;h the contumacious, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>That is in Engli&s;h, the Pre&s;bytery will keepe the Magi&s;trate do|ing; and now who di&s;parage the Magi&s;trates? who &s;et them on work? who make them their Deputie puni&s;hers? nay who is the Satante whom the excommunicate are delivered? it is an expre&s;&s;ion not much be&s;ldes your principles; and who disparages the Magi&s;trate in that?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>A little before you pleaded too much for peace, and now you would breake the peace, and play the make-bate betwixt the Ma|gi&s;tracy and the Presbytery, and to that purpo&s;e you make croo|ked con&s;equences from right words, and upright intentions, that you may at la&s;t put the name of Satan upon the Magi&s;trate in the name of a Presbyter; but take heed Sir, le&s;t &s;ome &s;ay (though I doe not) you de&s;erve the other name of that Arch-malignant, viz. <GAP DESC="foreign">, to be returned upon you, which is a fit title for a fal&s;e accu&s;er, and &s;o u&s;ed by the Apo&s;tle, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3.3. For how could you with truth, ingenuitie, or charitie, make &s;uch deductions as you doe from my words, in An&s;wer to yours? you &s;ay, (to make the Presbyteriall Government needle&s;&s;e,)<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">New Quere. p. 8.</NOTE> <HI>If morall tran&s;gre&s;&s;i|ons &s;tirre, let the Magi&s;trate be &s;et on in every place.</HI> I aske,<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Sect. 12. p. 41. of mine Exam.</NOTE> <HI>&s;et out
<PB N="70" REF="51">by whom? and how? Doth he meane that the Magi&s;trate is as a &s;hepheards dogge, to be &s;et on the wolfe that cometh to make &s;poile of the flocke? we cannot have &s;o meane a thought of the Magi&s;trate, as to make mention of him in &s;uch termes of di&s;paragement. Neither dare we take upon us, either &s;o much intere&s;t in all Magi&s;trates, or &s;o much power in any, as to give them the watch-word when to draw the &s;word, and to expect that they &s;hould wield it as we would have them.</HI> And not with&s;tanding the preaching of the Presbyters, and exerci&s;e of the Presbytery, <HI>there will be worke enough for the Ma|gi&s;trate to bring them under a civill triall,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>Are the&s;e words capable of &s;uch a glo&s;&s;e as you make of them, <HI>that the Pre&s;bytery will keepe the Magi&s;tracy doing,</HI> and <HI>now who di&s;parages the Magi&s;trates? who &s;ets them a worke?</HI> Not the Pre&s;|byterians, but you, and your party rather; for your words are, <HI>Let them be &s;et on. Who makes them Deputie puni&s;hers?</HI> Not the Pre&s;|byterians, who take no &s;uch power upon them as to appoint them to puni&s;h any one; nor (if they doe puni&s;h) accompt them De|puties to any, but doers of their own worke. <HI>Nay, who is the Sa|tan, to whom the excommunicate are delivered?</HI> The Magi&s;trate, as you imply, and impo&s;e that reproach upon Presbyterians; For you &s;ay, <HI>it is an expre&s;&s;ion not farre be&s;ide your principles, and who di&s;pa|rages the Magi&s;trate in that?</HI> But &s;tay good Sir, what Presbyteri|ans expound tho&s;e words of <HI>delivery unto Satan,</HI> 1 <HI>Corinth.</HI> 5.5. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 1.20. with an application to the Magi&s;trate? neither <HI>Cal|vin, Beza, Marl<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">rat, Pi&s;cator, Deodate,</HI> nor<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">In his late Booke again&s;t Era&s;tus cap. 11. q. 7. pag. 354, 355.</NOTE> M^r. <HI>Rutherford,</HI> nor any Presbyterian that ever I read, make the Magi&s;trate the Devill in the&s;e Texts; no nor <HI>Vatablus</HI> nor <HI>Aquinas,</HI> of the Popi&s;h Church; and I thinke it will be <HI>hard</HI> for you to finde any Authour of note, of what Religion &s;o ever, that &s;o takes, or rather mi&s;-takes the words as you doe; and <HI>impo&s;&s;ible</HI> to produce any Presbyterian principles, which with any colour or probabilitie may be drawn, or by any violence and importunitie be drag'd to &s;uch a &s;en&s;e of di&s;paragement of the Magi&s;trate, as you have &s;ugge&s;ted; and &s;o the calumny and contempt of their calling mu&s;t be laid at your doore, to father it as an ill-favoured brat of your own begetting.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="25" TYPE="section">
<PB N="71" REF="51">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXV.</HI> The Magi&s;trates a&s;si&s;tance to the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government, no argument to prove it no Gospel Government; the &s;word of God and of Gideon, of Church Di&s;cipline, and civill &s;everitie, how law|full and u&s;efull; zeale again&s;t toleration of evill commended connivence at it blameable.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 57.</LABEL><HI>YOu &s;ay you cannot divide di&s;cipline from his a&s;si&s;tance who can make it effectuall, that is, from the Magi&s;trate, this is a &s;igne without further argument, that you doe not hold your government for Chri&s;ts, becau&s;e it cannot be effectuall of it &s;elfe without helpe below.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Here as in many other places you &s;hew little ingenuitie in re|peating my words, which are not as you cite them; but thus,<NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Examination of the New Quere. Sect. 12. pag. 42.</NOTE> <HI>We cannot thinke it meet to divide &s;ub&s;ervient meanes from the &s;upreme power, nor the exerci&s;e of Di&s;cipline, and government from his A&s;|&s;i&s;tance who can make it effectuall, that is,</HI> (&s;ay you) <HI>from the Ma|gi&s;trate;</HI> and that is, &s;ay I, your <HI>maledicta glo&s;&s;a</HI> which corrupts the Text; my words import not the inferiour efficacy of the Ma|gi&s;trate, but the &s;uperiour of God; and therefore your inference upon it is a &s;econd injury, and violence you commit again&s;t my &s;aying and &s;ence; and yet though the Di&s;cipline be Chri&s;ts, we mu&s;t crave the con&s;ent and &s;anction of the Civill Magi&s;trates, that we may put it in practice, as the Presbyterians of the <HI>Dutch</HI> and <HI>French</HI> Churches in <HI>London;</HI> and with their a&s;&s;i&s;tance it may be more effectuall then without it it can be, as the Magi&s;trates anthe|ritie may have a more awfull operation upon the people if a&s;&s;i&s;ted by the Mini&s;ters in their Sermons, and popular exhortations; and yet you will not deny but that Magi&s;tracy is the ordinance of God, <HI>Rom.</HI> 13.1.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 57.</LABEL><HI>Nor is the &s;word of God and Gideon any faire, or iu&s;t proofe for
<PB N="72" REF="52">ioyning Pre&s;bytery and Magi&s;tracy, it onely ioynes God and the Ma|gi&s;trates.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>I joyne the &s;word of God and <HI>Gideon,</HI> not as a proofe for u|niting Presbytery and Magi&s;tracy, but as an illu&s;tration of a&s;&s;ociati|on of different meanes to the &s;ame end, or of concurrent opera|tions to the &s;ame purpo&s;e; and yet if the cau&s;e of God in the hands of the Presbytery doe need, and have aide in the hand of the Magi&s;trate to help it forward, there the &s;word of the Spirit, which is the &s;word of the Lord, in the mouth of his Mini&s;ters, and the &s;word of <HI>Gideon,</HI> that is, the &s;word of the Magi&s;trate, may be &s;aid to be joyned.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 57.</LABEL><HI>You &s;ay your godly it alou&s;ie will &s;et up as many &s;ecurities as may be. But then they are warrantable and Gospel wayes of &s;ecuritie; that is no godly iealou&s;ie which &s;ets up other wayes, as</HI> Herod <HI>killing all the young children to &s;ecure his kingdome,</HI> David <HI>di&s;&s;embling to e&s;cape,</HI> Iacob <HI>to get a ble&s;sing.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>To that you &s;aid;<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">New Quere. pag. 8.</NOTE> <HI>It is the Papi&s;ts and Prolates iealou&s;ie to keep up their &s;uppo&s;ed truths by &s;u&s;pecting every thing that appeares for an enemy:</HI> My An&s;wer was;<NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Examination of the New Quere. Sect. 12. pag. 42.</NOTE> <HI>There is a iealou&s;ie which the Apo&s;tle cal<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> godly iealou&s;ie, and &s;uch a one is that which would &s;et up as many &s;ecurities as may be again&s;t here&s;ie, and impiety; among them Church-government is one; of which, they that &s;tand for it are not afraid to let it go<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> abread, but have made it publique, and expo&s;ed it to the view of all eyes.</HI> To this you put in a Reply with a condition of <HI>warrantable and Go&s;pel wayes of &s;ecuritie,</HI> and an exception of wicked wayes, <HI>&s;uch as</HI> Herods <HI>killing all the young children,</HI> &amp;c. I in&s;tanced onely in the Church-government, which the Presby|terians propound, and plead for as a Go&s;pel way; you bring in <HI>Herods</HI> bloody bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, as if there were neere con&s;anguinitie betwixt the Presbytery and his barbarous crueltie; this is (though not to &s;lay innocents as he did yet) to wound and bla&s;t innocence, as much as may be, and to bring it under an evill &s;u&s;picion to make it odious; this is no Go&s;pel way M^r. <HI>Sa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">m.</HI> but a very wide aber|ration from it.</P>
<PB N="73" REF="52">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 57.</LABEL> <HI>You &s;ay that &s;ome feare Gods anger for communion with here|tiques, &amp;c. you know all &s;uch feare is onely warrantable in the Church, not in the world; you have liberate to withdraw and &s;epa|rate, as they from you; if it be nationall or civill communion, then you plucke up the tares before the time of harve&s;t.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>You &s;till give me cau&s;e to complaine of your unfaithfull dealing with my words, by &s;uch alteration, or omi&s;&s;ion of them as may make them more obvious to your exception, then as I &s;et them downe, for they are thus in my Booke;<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Exam. of the New Quere. Sect. 12. p. 43.</NOTE> <HI>But there is it feare which we profe&s;&s;e, and I hope without offence, it is a feare of Gods an|ger, and of imminent danger for communion with, and connivence towards hereticall and wicked men;</HI> and I brought examples, and &s;ayings of <HI>John</HI> the Evangeli&s;t, of <HI>Polycarpe, Hilary,</HI> and <HI>Ierome</HI> to that purpo&s;e, which you take no notice of at all; but &s;ay, <HI>&s;uch feare is onely warrantable in the Church, not in the world;</HI> but for that there is a remedy that men may &s;eparate from Church-Com|munion; but what if many will not, as the weaker and loo&s;er &s;ort are as ready to runne to hereticall Teachers, where they ex|erci&s;e, as the people of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> to the Idolamous wor&s;hip of the gol|den Calves; and &s;hall &s;uch be &s;uffered to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> them that through the ignorance of their minds, or unruline&s;&s;e of then lu&s;ts are wil|ling to be &s;educed? Will your con&s;cience with the Papi&s;ts tolerate the Stews, not in the Church, but in the Citie? it is not &s;o broad, nor loo&s;e I hope; no more &s;hould it be &s;o indulgent as to allow of inducements to &s;pirituall whoredome,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 span"></NOTE> which is as dangerous to men, and more di&s;honourable to God: The Angel of the Church of <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> I am &s;ure, is commended by the Holy Gho&s;t becau&s;e he could not beare them which were evill, <HI>Revel.</HI> 2.2. and for h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">|ting the deeds of the <HI>Nicolaitans,</HI> ver&s;. 6. as on the contrary the Angel of the Church of <HI>P<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">ga<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="3 letters"></HI> is blamed for &s;uffering &s;uch as held the Doctrine of <HI>Bala<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">m,</HI> and tho&s;e that held the Doctrine of the <HI>Nicolaitans,</HI> ver&s;. 12.14, 15. and &s;o is the Angel of the Church of <HI>Thyatir<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> for &s;uffering the woman <HI>J<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="3 letters">bal,</HI> which <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">l|leth
<PB N="74" REF="53">her &s;elfe a Prophete&s;&s;e, to teach and &s;educe the &s;ervants of the Lord, ver&s;. 18.20. and if &s;uch &s;educement may be as dan|gerous to many where heretiques teach in corners, as where they are admitted to officiate in publique Churches, that mu&s;t be no more endured then the other.</P>
<P>And for that you &s;ay of <HI>plucking up the tares before the harve&s;t,</HI> it makes nothing again&s;t the caution I meane, which is not to ex|tirpate all heretiques out of the world, but to put &s;uch a re&s;traint upon them, that they may not have power to &s;educe &s;imple &s;oules to &s;uch pernicious errours as may endanger them upon eternall damnation; and yet I hope you doe not meane but &s;ome wicked men may be &s;o wicked, and &s;o de&s;tructive in their principles and practices to Religion, and States, that it may be lawfull not onely to keepe, or put them out of all Church-Communion, but to take them quite out of all communion in the world, by capitall puni&s;h|ment, el&s;e you will have the Civill Magi&s;trate to beare the Sword for naught, again&s;t the determination of the Apo&s;tle, <HI>Rom.</HI> 13.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="26" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXVI. M^r. Saltm.</HI> his dangerous &s;uppo&s;ition of equality of Number and power, with diver&s;itie of Religion; of incorporation of two powers; and what may be expected &s;hould the Sectaries prevaile.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 58.</LABEL><HI>S&V;ppo&s;e tho&s;e you call hereticks, and who</HI> (as you &s;ay a little<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke.</HI> p. 57.</NOTE> be|fore) <HI>thinke they have as good Scriptures to e&s;teeme you &s;o, were of equall number to you; and both of you equally numbred with Ma|gi&s;trates.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>What cau&s;e or need in this difference betwixt you and me to take up &s;uch a terrible &s;uppo&s;ition as you make? for there would have beene no ground of &s;u&s;pition, if there had not been too much indulgence &s;hewed to hereticall, and &s;chi&s;maticall &s;educers; and
<PB N="75" REF="53">what doe you meane by &s;uppo&s;ing equalitie in number, power, and &s;pirit for conte&s;tation about contrary opinions? is it to make the <HI>Pre&s;byterians</HI> beleeve that the partie they take to be hereti|call is, or is like to be &s;o many and ma&s;terfull, that they will not &s;uffer the Church Government to be &s;ettled without <HI>cla&s;hing of &s;words,</HI> and bloody doings? Truly your courting of militarie men as you do, and others &s;olicitations of them, and brags of their power and purpo&s;e may be a ju&s;t ground of &s;u&s;pitio~ of &s;o bad an intention in &s;ome of your &s;ide, which now plead for liberty of con&s;cience, that if they had might to their minds they would a&s;&s;ert it with other in&s;truments, and would &s;ecure it with circum&s;cription, if not pre&s;cription, of the Civill power; as the King of Spaine did the liberty of election of the Emperour at <HI>Frankford</HI> (again&s;t King <HI>Francis</HI> the fir&s;t King of France his competitor for the Em|pire) who &s;ent thither an Army of 30000 men, that the choo&s;ers might be free and not forced,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Guicciard.</NOTE> whereby he &s;o overawed them that they dur&s;t not make their choice but in the family of the hou&s;e of <HI>Au&s;tria.</HI></P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 58.</LABEL><HI>This is an image of your Incorporation of your two powers, that you &s;o plead for in this kind.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Now truly S^r. you are a very &s;orry image-maker, that draw your picture &s;o imperfectly, &s;o gro&s;ly, like the rude Painters of old, who were fain to their mi&s;hapen pourtraitures to adde an In|&s;cription, <HI>this is a man,</HI> and <HI>this is an hor&s;e,</HI> or el&s;e a man could tell no more then a hor&s;e what the pictures re&s;embled. If you had not told your Reader <HI>this is an image of your Incorporation, &amp;c.</HI> he would never have thought you meant any &s;uch thing by what you have &s;aid; and now you have made your de&s;cription, and &s;et your &s;ub&s;cription to it, it is yet &s;o &s;mokie and ob&s;cure, that I doubt he cannot under&s;tand it, I am &s;ure I cannot perceive any truth or &s;ence in it: for what incorporation of powers doe we make and plead for? you &s;hould have &s;hewed what powers you meane, what incorporation of them we make, where and by what argu|ments
<PB N="76" REF="54">we plead for it; till you doe this, I &s;hall thinke your image a meere imagination, and a fanta&s;ticall Chimera.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 58.</LABEL><HI>If we were equally principled for per&s;ecution as you are, and alled by your &s;pirit, ah what a Kingdome would here be?</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>What principles of per&s;ecution doe Presbyterians hold, &s;et which they have not warrant from the word of God? all with you is per&s;ecution which in any &s;ort oppo&s;eth your lavi&s;h tolera|tion of all Religions, though never &s;o di&s;honourable to God, and damnable to man; the godly party in the time of the Prelates cried out upon pluralities, and <HI>&s;oule-murdering Non-re&s;idencie,</HI> ac|counting it an high and hainous crime in tho&s;e who withheld &s;pi|rituall food from the &s;oules of the people, and held that the State was bound to doe them right, to &s;ee them &s;upplied with nece&s;&s;ary provi&s;ion for their &s;alvation; and is there not a &s;oule murdering by poy&s;oning the peoples &s;oules with pernicious principles, as well as by withholding from them found and &s;alutary Doctrine? and is not the State bound to provide again&s;t this &s;pirituall perill, as well as the other? which if it may be done without drawing of a drop of blood, it is &s;o much more plea&s;ing to con&s;ciencious Presbyterians, as it is le&s;&s;e grievous to hereticall &s;educers; the wild bea&s;t may be kept and fedde within the grate, and the Fox confined to the length of a chaine, though they be not &s;uffered to range abroad, and make havock on the flock. And how are they armed for per&s;ecution of their adver&s;aries, when they not onely live, but thrive and flouri&s;h, and are advanced to places of honour and tru&s;t all over the Kingdome.</P>
<P>If the Presbyterians were &s;o &s;pirited, and &s;o armed with power as you pretend, how came the Independents to enjoy &s;uch a pro|&s;perous condition as they doe? And for the per&s;ecution of the Tongue and Pen, (for there may be words as keene and cutting as very &s;words) was there ever any &s;o &s;harpe and bitter as theirs, who, pretending to hate and per&s;ecute per&s;ecution, jeere and re|vile Presbyterie and Presbyters with &s;o much virulence that all
<PB N="77" REF="54">the &s;coffing <HI>I&s;hmaelites, Lucians, Martin Marprelates</HI> (of which la&s;t<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Jo&s;ias Ni|chols <HI>in his Book called the</HI> Plea of the Innocent.</NOTE> <HI>Io&s;ias Nichols</HI> a godly Nonconformi&s;t &s;aid he was &s;tirred up by Satan to hinder the worke of Reformation) put together make not up the mea&s;ure of their malignitie who plead for toleration of all Religions, as you doe, and who&s;e &s;pirit appeares to be &s;o fu|rious (though yours be more calme) that could they advance to the height of their hopes, and aimes, it is manife&s;t by their owne written words, that they would not tolerate a Presbyterian, but would bring him under intolerable &s;lavery; for they would have the<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">So in the <HI>Arraignment of Per&s;ecution,</HI> p. 36. Printed by <HI>Martine Claw-Clergy</HI> Printer to the Reverend A&s;|&s;embly of Di|vines for <HI>Bar|tholomew Bang-Prie&s;t,</HI> and are to be &s;old at his &s;hop in <HI>To|leration &s;treet.</HI> Anno. 1645.</NOTE> <HI>Pre&s;byterian Tribe led in a &s;tring from We&s;tmin&s;ter to Algate in leatherne jackets, and mattocks on their &s;houlders,</HI> and the words that follow pre&s;ently after, and clo&s;e up the Paragraph are, <HI>they would doe the State better &s;ervice with their Canonicall girdles</HI> (which very few of them weare) <HI>were the knot tied in the right place,</HI> the words are no &s;uch Riddle as to need an <HI>Oedipus</HI> to ex|pound them; Sir, I will returne you your owne words againe, and let the Reader judge whether they were more fitly objected by you, or retorted by me. <HI>If we were equally principled and armed for per&s;ecution, and acted by your &s;pirit</HI> (yours <HI>who breath out &s;uch threatnings and &s;laughters from Toleration &s;treet again&s;t Pre&s;by|terians) ab what a Kingdome would here be?</HI></P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="27" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXVII.</HI> The Authoritie of the Parliament not pleaded by the Pre&s;byterians as a &s;upplement of Scriptures, as <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> &s;ugge&s;teth; nor &s;lighted by them as by <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> it is; of the pretended danger of the Magi&s;trates engagement with the Mini&s;ters; of the pretended tender|ne&s;&s;e of con&s;ciences in Sectaries.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 58.</LABEL><HI>B&V;t you clo&s;e up with that of the Lords and Commous in an Or|dinance, &amp;c. I am afraid tho&s;e are &s;uch proofes as you intend mo&s;t in your Pre&s;bytery, to make your &s;upplement of Scriptures by Au|thoritie
<PB N="78" REF="55">&mdash; and to make us beleeve what you cannot per&s;wade us to beleeve, and to make it out by an Ordinance what you want by Scripture.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>You had made it a matter<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">New Quere. p. 8.</NOTE> <HI>of Popi&s;h and Prelaticall jealou&s;ie, to keepe up their &s;uppo&s;ed truths by &s;uspecting every thing that ap|peares for an enemie;</HI> Whereupon<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Exam. Sect. 12. p. 44.</NOTE> I &s;hewed that there were o|ther motives for oppo&s;ing of Here&s;ie and Schi&s;me, (be&s;ides &s;uch a jealou&s;ie) and I &s;hewed it by in&s;tances of zeale again&s;t Hereticks in divers of the Ancients, and concluded with an Ordinance of Parliament of the 20. of <HI>October,</HI> 1645. wherein they endeavour for the <HI>compleat e&s;tabli&s;hment of purity and unitie in the Church of God;</HI> hereupon you &s;ay, <HI>you are afraid the&s;e are &s;uch proofes as we intend mo&s;t in our Pre&s;byterie;</HI> proofes for what? If you take it for <HI>con&s;titution</HI> of a Presbyterie, we have proved that by Scripture before it was offered to the Parliament; if for <HI>execution,</HI> you mu&s;t either intend it of an Ordinance of Parliament, to enable us to &s;et up the Presbyterie, or for the particular proceedings in the Pre&s;|byterie; If you meane it of the former, we mu&s;t urge the Ordi|nance of Parliament for it; if any one que&s;tion it in a Civill Title, we mu&s;t plead it by &s;uch a warrant as the Ordinance; if for the particular proceedings, they mu&s;t have &s;uch profes and evidence as in other ca&s;es of difference, by per&s;onall conte&s;tation.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 58.</LABEL><HI>But I hope that Honourable Senate will rather let you argue from the Scripture again&s;t us, then from their Authoritie.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Doe you hope then that the Parliament will not e&s;tabli&s;h the Presbyterie by their Authoritie? or if they doe, that we will make no u&s;e of their Ordinance, to maintaine the puritie and unitie which that Honourable Senate intended, again&s;t the confu&s;ion of Here&s;ie and Schi&s;me? If &s;o, I doubt not but you will be deceived in both; and yet Sir the Presbyterian cau&s;e will be made good a|gain&s;t the whole circumference of Sects, who Center in Indepen|dency, for toleration of multiplicity of profe&s;&s;ions in matter of Re|ligion.</P>
<PB N="79" REF="55">
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 58.</LABEL> <HI>But I have not to doe here with an&s;wer of Ordinances of Par|liament. I contend not, but &s;ubmit to them in every Ordinance for the Lords &s;ake; nor doth my Argument lye again&s;t any thing of theirs, but yours: I dare not undervalue them to count them as Par|ties, but Iudges, in our difference I appeale to the Parliament as to Cae&s;ar; nor is it a faire proofe of truth to draw the Magi&s;trates &s;word out of the &s;cabbard.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><HI>But I have not to doe with an Ordinance of Parliament,</HI> &s;ay you, you might have let it alone; I laid no &s;uch weight of Argument upon it, as did engage you to an&s;wer it. Now whereas you &s;ay, <HI>you &s;ubmit to them in every Ordinance,</HI> it is but a complement, for were you &s;erious and &s;incere in this you profe&s;&s;e, would you doe as you, doe cry down Tythes as Antichri&s;tian, which the Parliament by Ordinance hath e&s;tabli&s;hed? or cry up &s;uch a libertie of con|&s;cience, and Preaching without Ordination, as they by Ordinance have forbidden? I could put the &s;ame Quere upon other particu|lars, wherein you make no more &s;cruple in practi&s;e to goe cro&s;&s;e to the Parliament, then in your words to contradict me.</P>
<P>Yet you &s;ay, <HI>you dare not undervalue them as to make them parties but Judges in our difference:</HI> Then their Authoritie mu&s;t decide the difference; and if the deci&s;ion &s;tick on your &s;ide, will you not accept, or make u&s;e of it to countenance your cau&s;e again&s;t us? you will not, you cannot deny it; why then &s;hould you &s;ay in your next words, <HI>It is no faire proofe of truth to draw the Ma|gi&s;trates &s;word out of the &s;cabbard:</HI> If they be Iudges, as you call them, and appeal be made unto them, (as by you it is) why &s;hould you impute it as a faulty drawing of the Magi&s;trates &s;word out of the &s;cabbard to produce their &s;entence, or make u&s;e of their Authority?</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>You wonder con&s;idering who was engaged I would &s;o undervalue them, to compare them with Papi&s;ts and Prelates.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="80" REF="56">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> <HI>You wonder?</HI><NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">My <HI>Exam.</HI> of your <HI>New. Quere.</HI> Sect. 12. pag. 44.</NOTE> I &s;aid, <HI>If you had well con&s;idered who were enga|ged for the e&s;tabli&s;hment of Church Government, and how farre, be|fore you publi&s;hed your New Quere, you would not &s;ure have &s;o farre undervalued their piety and prudence, as to compare them with Pa|pi&s;ts and Papall Prelates.</HI></P>
<P>Of the&s;e words you have made a <HI>wonder;</HI> you have not onely much freedome of fancy, but a great libertie of con&s;cience to am|plifie, or extenuate, or exchange the words of your adver&s;arie as you plea&s;e; and you doe it &s;o often, as to make your credulous Reader, who doth not examine whether you have cited my <HI>Ex|amination</HI> aright, to conceive that you have an&s;wered, yea con|quered in the Controver&s;ie; when you have but &s;landered my Text, declined the &s;trength of it, &s;moked the light of it, and con|founded the order of it, and gotten the victory onely of your own abu&s;ive allegation, or interpretation thereof.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>I did confider who was engaged, a Parliament, &amp;c. and had I not highly valued them, I had not ventured &s;o farre in my Quere.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>Not &s;o farre as to oppo&s;e, retard, and reproach the Church Go|vernment, wherein they were &s;o farre, &s;o publiquely engaged; is this to value them, to value them highly? if &s;uch be the price you &s;et upon &s;uch Honourable Patriots, I &s;hall never be ambitious of your good acceptation, nor &s;olicitous of your e&s;timation of me, whether the rate you &s;et upon me be pretious or vile.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>I con&s;idered the fatall troubles which attended the Magi&s;trates engagements with the Mini&s;ters.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>If the Mini&s;ters engagements in Religion be right, it is a hap|pine&s;&s;e that Magi&s;trates be engaged with them, and therefore on
<PB N="81" REF="56">the one &s;ide promi&s;ed as matter of great joy, and glory to the Church, that Kings &s;hould be unto it as <HI>nur&s;ing Fathers,</HI> and Queenes as <HI>nur&s;ing Mothers,</HI> I&s;a. 49.23. and on the other required as a dutie to <HI>pray for Kings and for all that are in authority, that we may lead a quiet life in all godline&s;&s;e and hone&s;ty,</HI> 1 Tim. 2.2. and in all Ages to this day the orthodoxe party have much de&s;ired the Patronage of Princes and civill States in their Religious mini&s;tra|tions, as a meanes to propagate the Go&s;pel in the power and pu|ritie of the Ordinances of Chri&s;t; and if the Parliament &s;hould (which the Lord forbid) yeeld to &s;uch a toleration of Religions as you propound, I would know whether you would not de&s;ire the &s;ecurity of State for that licence you lu&s;t after, if any &s;hould oppo&s;e you therein; and would you not have the power that granted it engage &s;o farre, as to make it good unto you, and to &s;uppre&s;&s;e tho&s;e who would debarre you of the libertie allowed you? We know the &s;pirit of your partie by their &s;peeches, and &s;ome practi&s;es &s;o well, that we doubt not of this, and we have cau&s;e rather to beleeve that you would not waite upon the Magi|&s;trates lei&s;ure, to right you in &s;uch a ca&s;e, if you had power for more &s;peedy remedy in your owne hands.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL>And I con&s;idered <HI>the bloud which hath beene poured out by Na|tionall compul&s;ion of teader con&s;ciences.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>In what Nation doe you meane? if in <HI>England,</HI> as I &s;uppo&s;e you doe, either onely or chiefly, I confe&s;&s;e that in the time of Popi&s;h Tyranny there was much blood poured out of the ve<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">es of &s;uch as had tender con&s;ciences, &s;o tender that they could en|dure death more willingly then Idolatry. And I deny not but the domination of the <HI>Starchamber,</HI> and the <HI>High Commi&s;&s;ion</HI> were very Tyrannicall, and injurious to tender con&s;ciences, and very bloody (e&s;pecially the Starchamber) to the por&s;ons of &s;uch as came under their cen&s;ure; for I have read the reports of the cruel u&s;ager of M^r. <HI>Prim<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">,</HI> D^r. <HI>Ba&s;twick<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">,</HI> and M^r. <HI>Burton;</HI> and truly Sir, I could not but be affected with compa&s;&s;ion towards M^r. <HI>Lil|burne,</HI>
<PB N="82" REF="57">and with indignation towards his per&s;ecutors (though he have often bewrayed a bitter &s;pirit by many di&s;dainfull contu|melies again&s;t them) upon the reading of the late Relation of his &s;ufferings proved before the Right Honourable the Hou&s;e of <HI>Peeres,</HI> Feb. 13. 1645. wherein it is te&s;tified that<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Pag. 3.</NOTE> <HI>he was whip|ped from Fleet bridge to We&s;tmin&s;ter &s;o cruelly, that the cords brui&s;ed his &s;houlders, and made them &s;well as bigge as a penny leafe, and wheales on his backe bigger then a Tobacco-pipe; and that the Warden of the Fleet cau&s;ed him to be gagged in &s;uch a cruell manner as if he would have torne his jawes in pieces.</HI></P>
<P>But did not the Parliament &s;o farre abominate the Tyranny of the&s;e Courts as utterly to depo&s;e them, and to exclude the Bi|&s;hops out of the Hou&s;e of Peers? and will you compare their en|gagements for the puritie and unitie of a reformed Religion, and Government, with the intolerable-Tyranny of &s;uch mercile&s;&s;e oppre&s;&s;ours?</P>
<P>And for the tender con&s;ciences &s;o much, &s;o plau&s;ibly pleaded for by you, and your partie, many who had good meanes to know Sectaries, and no bad minds to mi&s;-report of them, finde that for a few tender con&s;ciences among them, there are many le|prous, ulcerous, blinded, hardned, and cauterized con&s;ciences; to which if the State &s;hould be &s;o tender as you would have them, it would be cruell to farre better Chri&s;tians.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="28" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXVIII.</HI> What a Trumpeter <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> is; his reproach of the Parliament plaine enough, though rather implied then expre&s;&s;ed; A chal|lenge of him to prove his in&s;inuated &s;ugge&s;tions of Trea&s;on, Bla&s;phemie, &amp;c. in my Exami|nation of his New Quere.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>ANd like a &s;pirituall watchman I could not but blow my Trumpet.</HI></P></Q>
<PB N="83" REF="57">
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL> The premi&s;es con&s;idered, your Trumpet is as the Trumpet of <HI>Sheba</HI> the &s;onne of <HI>Bichri</HI> &s;ounded to &s;edition, a <HI>Sam.</HI> 20.1.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>And for my compari&s;on of Papi&s;ts and Prelates, I appeale to the world if there be any reproach, whether it be not in the Interpreter rather then in the Authour.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL><HI>For my compari&s;on of Papi&s;ts and Prelates,</HI> If you compare Pa|pi&s;ts and Prelates, it is not &s;o great a reproach to Prelates for the mo&s;t part to be matched with Papi&s;ts, as for the Presbyterians to be likened to the wor&s;t of either, as you make the compari&s;on; but you &s;hould have &s;aid further, <HI>for my re&s;emblance of &s;uch as de|&s;ire and endeavour the &s;peedy &s;etting up of Government to Papi&s;ts and Prelates</HI> (for &s;o you made it in your Quere, p. 8.) I appeale (not to the world, that is too wide a compa&s;&s;e for a Iudicatory as well as for a Church, but) to the ingenuous and impartiall Reader, whether the Parliament, making as much ha&s;te as they can to fini&s;h the Governement, that they may e&s;tabli&s;h it by their civill Sanction, be not implicitly taken into that imputation; and let him judge al&s;o whether the reproach be in the Authour or in the Interpreter.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>If it be lawfull, &s;ay you, to draw in con&s;equent conclu&s;ions, and then father them, I could prove you to &s;peake Trea&s;on, Blasphemie, Idolatry, Athei&s;me, Here&s;ie, nay Independency, which &s;ome of you may thinke wor&s;e, Anabapti&s;me, Separation, which would &s;eeme to be as hatefull to you; but I judge you not in any &s;uch &s;ort; nor had I &s;poken &s;o farre now, but in a ju&s;t vindication.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>If it be lawfull? why &s;hould you doubt of it, but that it is law|full? If I have any premi&s;es which you can make parents to bring forth &s;uch corrupt and criminall conclu&s;ions, &s;pare me not Sir; nay
<PB N="84" REF="58">I challenge you to lay downe your antecedent in my words, and bring in your con&s;equent of Trea&s;on, Bla&s;phemie, Idolatry. A|thei&s;me, &amp;c. out of them; which if you can doe by any faire and unforced deduction, I will take you for an unerring Oracle, and follow you with an implicit faith, with punctuall ob&s;ervance and imitation of you whither&s;oever you goe, through all your vatia|tions of Here&s;ie, and Schi&s;me, though you ramble all over the Ca|talogue of them, as <HI>Irenaeus, Epiphanius, Phila&s;trius, Brixlen&s;it,</HI> and <HI>Augu&s;tine</HI> of old, or any later Haere&s;iographers have &s;et them forth; but if you cannot doe this, (as I know you cannot) with what con&s;cience do you give out a &s;u&s;pition, or in&s;inuation of &s;uch abominable guilt? what an ungodly guile is this? how far from the Chri&s;tian charitie of a man pretending the &s;pirit of meekne&s;&s;e, and moderation, as you doe?<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 2. nu. 3.</NOTE> <HI>Let a &s;pirit of meekne&s;&s;e</HI> (&s;ay you) <HI>runne in the Artery of Preaching and Printing;</HI> how farre from finceritie, to rai&s;e &s;uch a &s;moke of infamie and reproach upon the reputation of him whom you &s;tyle &s;ometimes<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">In the In|&s;cription of your Letter.</NOTE> <HI>a Friend,</HI> &s;ome|times<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 26.</NOTE> <HI>a Brother,</HI> and to whom you profe&s;&s;e a threefold re&s;pect for his age, learning, and place, in your Letter unto him? this &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">re|ly is the <HI>beame in your eye</HI><NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Your Letter to me. <HI>p. b.</HI></NOTE> you &s;pake of, while you are curious to take out the <HI>mote in mine eye;</HI> and for that you &s;ay of Indepen|dencie wor&s;e thought of then Trea&s;on, Bla&s;phemie, Idolatrie, A|thei&s;me, &amp;c. I know no Presbyterian that thinks &s;o of Indepen|dencie, <HI>ut &s;ic,</HI> ab&s;tractively, but con&s;idering the concurrence of many dangerous and damnable opinions with it, and their pro|tection and propagation by it, it may perhaps be truly &s;aid, that Independencie exten&s;ively, comprehen&s;ively, and effectively, though not formally, or inten&s;ively may be wor&s;o then other er|routs, or here&s;ies, forced under that &s;uppo&s;ed golden head, or em|braced in its <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">ver <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word">, though they be at the be&s;t but as the belly and thighs of bra&s;&s;e; and at the wor&s;t as legges of iron, and feet in part of iron, in part of clay, as in <HI>Nebuchadnezzars</HI> Image, <HI>Dan.</HI> 2. <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 32, 33.</P>
<P>I &s;hould require and expect your ingenuous acknowledgement of this injurious and uncharitable charge, but that you have di|rected me to another remedie of the wrong you doe me; where you &s;ay in your Epi&s;tle to me, <HI>If you finde any pa&s;&s;ions in my Booke,
<PB N="85" REF="58">charge them upon mine unregenerate part, for I finde that when I would doe good evill is pre&s;ent with me.</HI></P>
<P>According to this di&s;tinction a female di&s;ciple of &s;ome <HI>Anti|nomian</HI> Teacher (who would be thought too good a Chri&s;tian to be a member of any Congregation that met in a Steeple-hou&s;e) made her eva&s;ion from an accu&s;ation of the&s;e; for when her Mi|&s;tre&s;&s;e charged her for &s;tealing her linnens, and other things, which &s;he found in her che&s;t, or trunck, &s;he denied that &s;he &s;tole them; and when &s;he asked how came they to be laid and locked up there, Did not you doe this? No, &s;aid &s;he. <HI>It was not I, but &s;inne that dwelleth in me.</HI></P>
<P>That this is no tale fained, or taken up on tru&s;t to reproach &s;uch profe&s;&s;ours as pretend to an extraordinarie &s;traine of Evangelicall perfection, but a true &s;torie, will be made good by evidence be|yond exception to &s;uch as &s;hall que&s;tion the truth thereof: But whether true, or fal&s;e, you will haply &s;ay, what is this to you? Truly &s;o much as her excu&s;e for her theeverie hath the more con|formitie with your excu&s;e for your calumnie; but I bring it in but occa&s;ionally, and it is more pertinent I confe&s;&s;e to mind you of your owne faults then of others.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>You &s;ay you will conclude with my Politicks, &amp;c.</HI> The An&s;wer to this &s;ee in the Epi&s;tle.</P></Q>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 N="29" TYPE="section">
<HEAD><HI>SECT. XXIX.</HI> The charge of mi&s;application of <HI>Revel. 18.1.</HI> iu&s;tified again&s;t <HI>M^r. Saltm.</HI> his deniall. The expectation of new lights which &s;ome Sectaries teach, Papi&s;ticall, fallacious, and dangerous.</HEAD>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>YOu &s;ay of my Text,</HI> Revel. 18.1. <HI>that at I began, &s;o I and, with mi&s;application of Scripture; Mi&s;application is a word &s;ooner
<PB N="86" REF="59">writ then proved, and my re&s;ons were rather crowded then ordered in my paper; the Scripture was this, For the Angel that came downe from heaven hath great power, and the earth is lightned with his glory.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>If you would cleare the Scripture from mi&s;application, you mu&s;t &s;hew how it came in with a <HI>for,</HI> as a rea&s;on of the precedent pa&s;&s;age: your next words before it are, <HI>The Gospel dares walke abroad with boldne&s;&s;e, and &s;implicity, when traditions of men like melancholy people feare every thing they meet will kill them;</HI> and then immediately (not a word betweene) you &s;ay, <HI>For the An|gel that comes downe from heaven hath great power, and the earth is lightned with his glory.</HI></P>
<P>If this be not a mi&s;application of Scripture, I adde further, if it be not an ab&s;urd one, and your defence of it ridiculou&s;ly vaine, and your appeale to the Reader a pre&s;umption, that you take him to be very &s;tupid, or &s;o fond as to follow you in all you &s;ay with an implicit <HI>faith,</HI> let the judicious and impartiall Reader judge.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>Which Scripture there applied doth hint to any that will not ra|ther cavill then interpret, that my rea&s;on for delay of Government was in this; An Angel was yet to come.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>You &s;aid before your rea&s;ons were rather crowded then or|dered, (though I know not why you &s;hould put your &s;elfe into &s;uch a precipitation of ha&s;te) If &s;o, it is not &s;trange they &s;hould be mi&s;placed, and tho&s;e ca&s;t behind which &s;hould come before, as in a crowd it falleth out. And truly for this te&s;timonie, and the rea|&s;on of it, with what went afore it, it comes in a great deale too late to be pertinently applied; for you had ended your rea&s;ons, (&s;uch as they were) for the delay of Government a good while be|fore, and now were at the end of your &s;econd Objection, where there was roome enough, before you loo&s;ed your Pen from Paper, to have made a reference of that Text to its proper place, and to have told your Reader what you meant by it as now you doe; and
<PB N="87" REF="59">then I &s;hould have told you that that Text is as much mi&s;applied for want of truth, had it come in where it might &s;eeme to be mo&s;t certaine, as here for want of &s;en&s;e and &s;utablene&s;&s;e to the precedent words. For,</P>
<P>The Government of the Church is, (as you have acknow|ledged before) a Scripture Government; and unle&s;&s;e you waite for an Angel from heaven to bring another Go&s;pel, who by the doome of the Apo&s;tle, &s;hould he come, &s;hould be welcomed with a cur&s;e, <HI>Gal.</HI> 1.8. you mu&s;t not looke for another Go&s;pel Govern|ment; if you refu&s;e the Scripture light in expectation of Evange|licall Revelations, take heed you comply not with the Papi&s;ts, (whom you pretend to abhorre) making<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Bellarm. de notis Eccle&s;. Tom. <HI>2.</HI> l. <HI>4.</HI> c. <HI>15.</HI> p. <HI>278.</HI></NOTE> Propheticall light or revelation a note of the Church, and pretending Revelations from<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Legend. aur. fol. <HI>255.</HI> p. <HI>1.</HI> col. <HI>1.</HI> Portifer. &s;eu Breviar. in u&s;um Eccle&s;. Satisbur. part Estrval. in Fe|stum S^r^i. Egid. Sept. <HI>1.</HI> lect. <HI>9. printed</HI> Paris pervid. Franci&s;c. Regnault. <HI>an. 1555.</HI> Thelmes <HI>of the Saints out of</HI> Villegas &amp; Ri|bad. vol. <HI>1.</HI> part. <HI>1.</HI> p. <HI>87, 88, 98.</HI></NOTE> Angels. And if you &s;ay your Brethren the Anabapti&s;ts have their revelations, and many others be&s;ides them talke of new lights. I doubt they are for the mo&s;t part but like your Book, which offers Smoke for light, and <HI>&s;ome of them</HI> very de&s;tructive illu&s;ions of Sa|tan; as that of the Anabapti&s;t of<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg">Sleydan Com|ment. ad <HI>an. 1527.</HI> l. <HI>6.</HI> fol. <HI>87.</HI> b.</NOTE> <HI>Sangalli</HI> a Towne of <HI>Helvetia,</HI> who cut off his owne Brothers head in his parents pre&s;ence, tel|ling them it was revealed to him, and commanded him of God, he &s;hould do &s;o; and <HI>none of them</HI> &s;uch as may be a rule of direction to any &s;ocietie of pious, and prudent men, much le&s;&s;e to tho&s;e by who&s;e Authoritie the Government is to be &s;et up, and &s;ettled throughout the whole Kingdome.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>An Angel was yet to come with power and glory.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>The Angel whereof <HI>John</HI> prophecie was to come after his time, but now about &s;ixteene hundred yeeres are pa&s;&s;ed &s;ince he had that vi&s;ion, and how can you &s;ay he is yet to come, in re&s;pect of the time wherein we have this debate? what Angel or Spirit hath &s;tood by you, as by <HI>Paul,</HI> and told you that we mu&s;t yet expect &s;uch an Angel to come, and when he will come? that when he comes he will bring a revelation of Church Govern|ment with him, which hath been kept all this while in the darke?
<PB N="88" REF="60">if you have any warrant, any good ground for &s;uch a vi&s;ion, and re|velation from heaven, &s;hew it; it is a matter of too great mo|ment to be taken upon tru&s;t, upon your bare word, or of any mans alive; and it may be Sir you may waite for this Angel as long as the Iewes have done for another <HI>Me&s;&s;ias,</HI> and at la&s;t faile of your expectation as they have done, and for ever mu&s;t doe.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>Or the Go&s;pel will fill the earth with more light.</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>You &s;ent forth your <HI>Dawnings</HI> of light the la&s;t yeare, but in &s;tead of faire day light next to follow, you pre&s;ent us with a <HI>Smoke;</HI> what Go&s;pel-light you meane is too darke to me, and it may be al&s;o to your &s;elfe; If you meane the new lights that Sectaries bragge of, they are, and I bele<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">ve all Scripture-learned Chri&s;tians will take them but for the glimmerings of an <HI>ignis fatuus,</HI> &s;ome illu&s;ive fla&s;hes from the &s;hining of Satan, when he puts on his holy-day habit, and pre&s;ents him&s;elfe as in the apparition of an Angel of light, 2 Cor. 11.14.</P>
<P>To me they repre&s;ent the juggling impo&s;ture of a Popi&s;h Prie&s;t, of whom <HI>Era&s;mus</HI> writes in one of his Epi&s;tles, that he got together many Crab-fi&s;hes, and tied pieces of Wax candles light|ed at their clawes, who crawling up and downe in the Church-yard in the night, made the lights moveable to and fro; and the &s;imple people &s;eeing them at di&s;tance, (for they dur&s;t not come neere them) the Prie&s;t made them beleeve they were &s;oules come from Purgatorie, which needed and craved the prayers of good people for their relea&s;e. As many as have not their eye &s;ight hurt by your Smoke (for <HI>Solomon</HI> &s;heweth, <HI>Prov.</HI> 10.26. and experience complaines of it as ill for the eyes,) will take ma|ny of the new lights, &s;o much talked and boa&s;ted of by divers of your partie, rather for &s;uch fal&s;e illu&s;ions, then for true illu|minations.</P>
<Q><P><LABEL><HI>Smoke.</HI> Pag. 59.</LABEL><HI>So as we &s;hould not &s;hut up our &s;elves too &s;oone in the darke; And
<PB N="89" REF="60">now Reader judge whether it be my mi&s;-application or his mi&s;-in|terpretation,</HI></P></Q>
<P><LABEL>Light.</LABEL>That we might not be &s;hut up too long in the darke, I have brought all this light of truth to di&s;pell your vapour of errour, and &s;lander; and now I may, I doubt not, the premi&s;es con&s;idered, and judiciou&s;ly weighed, conclude, as you doe, with an addre&s;&s;e to the Reader, but with a nece&s;&s;ary tran&s;mutation of your termes, <HI>Now Reader judge whether mi&s;-interpretation be not a word &s;ooner &s;aid then proved, as well as mi&s;-application, and whether it be my mi&s;-interpretation, or his mi&s;-application.</HI> Here he ends his ex|ceptions again&s;t me; and here I fixe my period of Apology a|gain&s;t them.</P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="postscript">
<PB REF="61">
<PB N="91" REF="61">
<HEAD><HI>A Po&s;t&s;cript</HI> in An&s;wer to <HI>M^r. Saltmar&s;h</HI> his Po&s;t&s;cript, con&s;i&s;ting of two te&s;timonies of <HI>Claudius Sal|ma&s;ius,</HI> the one again&s;t the forme of Bapti&s;me in the name of the Father, Sonne and holy Gho&s;t; the other for Independency of Churches.</HEAD>
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<HEAD><HI>1.</HI> Of Baptizing in the Name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t.</HEAD>
<P>_YOur allegation out of the excellently learned <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> is lyable to manifold exceptions.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, In that you make him a <HI>German</HI> Writer, whereas he is not a <HI>German,</HI> but a <HI>Frenchman</HI> borne; nor is he a Writer in <HI>Ger|many,</HI> for he is an <HI>honorarius profe&s;&s;or</HI> at <HI>Leyden</HI> in <HI>Holland,</HI> where you &s;ay, he is im|ployed by the State to write.</P>
<P>I &s;uppo&s;e (you are &s;o addicted to noveltie) you will not for your defence have recour&s;e to a record of Antiquitie, which<NOTE N="a" PLACE="marg">Salma&s;. de Primatu Papae. c. <HI>17</HI> p. <HI>261.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Sal|ma&s;ius</HI> citeth out of <HI>Marcellinus,</HI> wherein both <HI>Germanyes</HI> and <HI>Belgium</HI> were comprehended under the name of <HI>France.</HI></P>
<P>Secondly, But to come from the man to the matter, your alle|gation out of him con&s;i&s;teth of two particulars; the fir&s;t whereof is of the manner of Bapti&s;me, for that you cite <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> thus.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, <HI>That the Baptizing in the Name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t, is not the way of Bapti&s;me practi&s;ed by the Apo&s;tles.</HI></P>
<PB N="92" REF="62">
<P>Secondly, <HI>The Bapti&s;me of Apo&s;tolicall u&s;e and in&s;titution is in the rivers, not with invocation of the three per&s;ons, &s;eeing the Apo|&s;tles baptized onely in the Name of the Lord Ie&s;us Chri&s;t;</HI> the later of the&s;e you &s;et down in the words of<NOTE N="b" PLACE="marg">Bapti&s;ma in aquis perennibus Apo&s;tolici in&s;ti|tuti &amp; moris, &s;ed non invocatio Trinitatis &s;uper Baptizatum, cum Apo&s;toli in &s;olo nomine Je&s;u Baptizarent. Salma&s;. in Ap|parat. ad lib. de Primatu Papa. pag. <HI>193.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> in Latine; wherein three things are to be con&s;idered.</P>
<P N="1">1. The forme of Bapti&s;me, <HI>In the Name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. The matter of it, <HI>River water.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. The &s;cope of <HI>Salma&s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"></HI> in the&s;e a&s;&s;ertions of Bapti&s;me.</P>
<P><HI>Fir&s;t,</HI> For the forme of Bapti&s;me, <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> doth not, as you doe, Except again&s;t that forme of Bapti&s;me at all, much le&s;&s;e for this rea&s;on,<NOTE N="c" PLACE="marg"><HI>Smoke.</HI> p. 13, 14. of the fir&s;t order of fi|gures.</NOTE> becau&s;e Ie&s;us Chri&s;t left it not made up to the hands of the Apo&s;tles; for if the Apo&s;tles baptized onely <HI>in the Name of the Lord Ie&s;us,</HI> it doth not appeare they had any forme for that left unto them by Chri&s;t, no more then of the other, <HI>In the Name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t.</HI> And if the Apo&s;tles u&s;ed that forme, it was not becau&s;e the other was unlawfull, but be|cau&s;e it was that wherein the practice of Bapti&s;me began in the Mini&s;tery of <HI>Iohn Bapti&s;t. Act.</HI> 19.4. and yet from your own<NOTE N="d" PLACE="marg">Smoke. p. 14. n<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">. 6.</NOTE> Ex|po&s;ition of Baptizing <HI>In the Name of Ie&s;us Chri&s;t</HI> in your next word <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> will follow, that it is as lawfull to baptize <HI>In the Name of the Father, Sonne, and holy Gho&s;t,</HI> as <HI>in the Name of the Lord Ie&s;us.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Secondly,</HI> For the matter of Bapti&s;me, <HI>River-water,</HI> you differ much from <HI>Salma&s;ius,</HI> for he takes it <HI>literally,</HI><NOTE N="e" PLACE="marg">Smoke. <HI>Ibid. pag.</HI> 13.</NOTE> you <HI>figuratively.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Thirdly,</HI> For the &s;cope, <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> his ayme in what he &s;aid of the manner of Bapti&s;me, and other Rites, was to &s;hew the diver|&s;itie of them, and various u&s;e of them, for confutation of the &s;u|per&s;titions of Papi&s;ts; but you bring it in to plead for the pre&s;ump|tion, and countenance the continuacy of Antipopi&s;h Sectaries.</P>
<P>Your other Te&s;timony you bring in thus, <HI>Salma&s;ius his Te|&s;timony again&s;t the pre&s;ent Pre&s;byteriall way.</HI></P>
<P>You might have added, (as you Engli&s;h it afterwards) <HI>for the Independency of Churches.</HI> If he write for Independency of Chur|ches again&s;t the Presbyteriall way, he is an Independent, and then I may retort the Te&s;timony upon you, and make the Title thus, <HI>The Te&s;timony of Salma&s;ius <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> Independent for the The Pre&s;byteriall
<PB N="93" REF="62">way, again&s;t Independency;</HI> For I can bring as good evidence for the Presbyteriall way out of <HI>Salma&s;ius,</HI> as you can doe again&s;t it; and yet is not <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> a<NOTE N="f" PLACE="marg">That Mr. <HI>Saltm.</HI> may not thinke me too youthfull in bringing in this <HI>paranoma&s;ie,</HI> and &s;o with an affected gravitie take upon him to reprove me for it, I will pre&s;ent him with &s;ome examples of <HI>paranoma&s;ies</HI> in the <HI>Hebrew of the old Te&s;tament,</HI> as <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>God &s;hall enlarge or per&s;wade Japhet,</HI> Gen. 9.27. and in that <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>Dan &s;hall iudge his people,</HI> Gen. 49.16. and in that <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>Nabal is his name and folly is with him,</HI> 1 Sam. 25.25. and in the <HI>Greeke of the New Te&s;tament,</HI> as <GAP DESC="foreign">. Rom. 1. ver&s;. 29.31. <HI>and in the Fathers,</HI> as in <HI>Augu&s;tine,</HI> who &s;peaking of <HI>Fau&s;tus</HI> the <HI>Manichee,</HI> &s;aith thus, <HI>Legent qui volunt, &amp; invenient aut falli imprudenter, aut fallere impudenter,</HI> Aug. contr. Fau&s;t. Manich. lib. 22. cap 32. and in another place; <HI>Nihil opus e&s;t ut e<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> cum di&s;crimine definiantur, quae &s;inc crimine ne&s;ciuntur:</HI> Aug. de Trin. lib. 8. cap. 5.</NOTE> <HI>Saltmar&s;hius,</HI> mutable in his Tenets, uncon&s;tant and contradictory to him&s;elfe, as you are.</P>
<P>His words that &s;eeme to make for you, you <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">t down <HI>fir&s;t in Latine,</HI> which you &s;o cite, as he that taketh you for a faithfull Scribe, mu&s;t take him for a very poore Scholler, and ignorant of Grammer, (who is acknowledged by competent Iudges of his abilities, abundantly witne&s;&s;ed in works, to be a man eminently furni&s;hed with all kinde of knowledge) for in fourteene lines you &s;et down no fewer then &s;eventeene errours, which mu&s;t imply either gro&s;&s;e ignorance, or &s;upine negligence in your &s;elfe, or in tho&s;e whom you employed in the printing of your booke, as he that diligently compareth his originall, and your tran&s;cript will ac|knowledge: <HI>and &s;econdly in Engli&s;h,</HI> thus,</P>
<P><NOTE N="g" PLACE="marg">Duobus modis haec Independen|tia Eccle&s;iarum accipi pote&s;t, &s;i vel respectum non habeant ad viciu<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">s ullas Eccle&s;ias, aut &s;i non pendeant ab authoritate aliquot Eccle&s;iarum &s;imul in unam Cla&s;&s;em vel Synodum conjunctarum, cujus convent<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> partem &amp; ip&s;ae faci|ant; prior modus &s;imilior reperitur primitivae Eccle&s;iae praxi, con&s;uetudini ac u&s;ui, quo voluntaria haec communio inter Eccle&s;ias fuit: po&s;terior magis convenit cum in&s;tituto quod po&s;tea juris humani dispo|&s;itione introduction e&s;t. Hoc pos;teriore modo liberta<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> particularium Eccle&s;iarum magis imminuta vi|detur quam priore. Sed quod ab initio fuerit voluntatis, po&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> facta<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> e&s;t juris. Hoc jus &s;ane po&s;iti|vum, atque Eccle&s;ia&s;ticum, humanumque, <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 word"> divinum; juris e&s;t quidem divini ut una &s;it Eccle&s;ia Chri&s;ti, unita<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> autem eju<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> non gregalium aut concorpor<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">lium plurium adurata collectione con&s;i&s;tit, &s;ed in <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 span"> doctri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters"> un<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">imi con&s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">n&s;ion<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">. Salma&s;ius <HI>in apparatu ad libr. de Primat. Papae; pag. 265. 266.</HI></NOTE><HI>This Independency of Churches may be taken two wayes; either as not having respect to any neighbour Churches, or as not depending on the authoritie of &s;ome Churches, that are ioyned in &s;ome Cla&s;ses,
<PB N="94" REF="63">or Synod, of which the Churches them&s;elves may make a part; The former way is found to be more like the practi&s;e, cu&s;tome, and u&s;e of the Primitive Church, whereby this voluntary communion was a|mong the Churches. The latter way doth more agree with the in&s;ti|tution which afterwards was introduced by a humane authoritie. By this latter way the libertie of particular Churches &s;eemes to be le&s;&s;e</HI> (more, you &s;hould &s;ay) <HI>dimini&s;hed then by the former. But that which from the beginning was arbitrary, afterwards is made nece&s;&s;a|ry [as a law.] This law truly is po&s;itive, and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, and humane, not divine. 'Tis by a divine law that the Church of Chri&s;t &s;hould be one, but the unitie of it doth not con&s;i&s;t in the union [or col|lection] of many that are of the &s;ame flocke or body, but in the unanimous con&s;ent, agreement in faith and doctrine.</HI></P>
<P>In this &s;aying of <HI>Salma&s;ius,</HI> you have not a word again&s;t the lawfulne&s;&s;e of the &s;ubordination of Churches in the Presbyteriall Government; and that which &s;ounds in favour of Independency, is but this;</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, <HI>That the States of Churches by them&s;elves, without re|spect, or relation to any neighbour Churches, are more like the pra|cti&s;e, cu&s;tome, and u&s;e of the Primitive Church, where a volun|tary communion was among the Churches.</HI> He doth not &s;ay our Sa|viour did in&s;titute that Government, nor that the Apo&s;tles gave any order for it, nor that it was the &s;ame that was in the Primitive Church, but that it was like the practi&s;e, cu&s;tome, and u&s;e of the Primitive Church.</P>
<P>And &s;o we &s;ay of <HI>Baptizing in rivers,</HI> of <HI>receiving the Sacra|ment at night,</HI> of the <HI>love fea&s;ts, greetings with an holy ki&s;&s;e, and communitie of goods,</HI> and many other particulars; but it will not follow that in our time, and State it is better to <HI>Baptize in rivers</HI> then in Churches, to <HI>receive the Sacrament at night</HI> then in the morning, and to continue tho&s;e <HI>love fea&s;ts, and ki&s;&s;es of love,</HI> which for the abu&s;e of them were left off by the religious many hundred yeares agoe; nor that <HI>communitie of goods</HI> is better then the pro|prietie of them, as in the pre&s;ent age.</P>
<P>Secondly, He &s;aith, <HI>The later way, that is, of union of Churches in Cla&s;&s;es, and Synods, doth more agree with the in&s;titution which af|terwards was introduced by humane authoritie.</HI> To which I an|&s;wer,
<PB N="95" REF="63">that the In&s;titution of it might be before, and the practi&s;e of it according to the In&s;titution come in afterwards; or if it were but in&s;tituted afterwards by humane authoritie, it doth not follow that it was without, much le&s;&s;e again&s;t authoritie divine; for he &s;aith, as you cite him, <HI>it is by a divine law that the Church of Chri&s;t &s;hould be one;</HI> if &s;o, it is a dictate of naturall prudence, which is a beame of divine light, (though not an expre&s;&s;e and po&s;itive law of God) that all ju&s;t and fit meanes to pre&s;erve this union, &s;o farre as the State and condition of the Church, and time will permit, be made u&s;e of it; and that is an union in Cla&s;&s;icall, and Synodicall A&s;&s;emblies.</P>
<P>Thirdly, That <HI>by this later way,</HI> that is, the way of a&s;&s;ociation, and &s;ubordination in, and to both Cla&s;&s;es, and Synods, the libertie of particular <HI>Churches &s;eemes to be more dimini&s;hed;</HI> where he &s;peak|eth cautelou&s;ly, &s;aying, <HI>it &s;eemeth</HI> to be more dimini&s;hed; it may &s;eeme, and yet not be as it &s;eemes; but if the libertie be more di|mini&s;hed, the &s;afetie of it by that meanes is more a&s;&s;ured, and the authoritie of it the more &s;trengthened, while it governeth aright, in that if the cen&s;ures of it be &s;lighted, while they are ju&s;t, they will be ratified by the &s;uperiour A&s;&s;embly, and the contumacy of offenders the more kept down.</P>
<P>Fourthly, That <HI>what from the beginning was Arbitrary, after|ward was made nece&s;&s;ary as a law, this law truly is Po&s;itive, Eccle|&s;ia&s;ticall, and Humane, not Divine.</HI> It might be arbitrary from the beginning, while there were few Chri&s;tians for Churches, few Churches for union, and tho&s;e perhaps not &s;o &s;ituate that they could with convenience, or &s;afetie come under &s;uch a combina|tion, or &s;ubordination as was requi&s;ite for the Churches &s;ecuritie again&s;t here&s;ie and &s;chi&s;me; but if after the beginning (how long, or little a while is hard to know) it were thought &s;o nece&s;&s;ary, as to be formed up into a law, (though it were not divine but hu|mane, po&s;itive, and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall) and coming under no com|plaint for impietie again&s;t God, or injury to man, and withall con|ducing directly to &s;uch ends as but now I noted, it is more for &s;ub|ordinate Presbytery, then that which hath been alleadged for the Independency, w^c^h you and your party &s;o importunately plead for.</P>
<P>All this con&s;idered that you have produced in the name of
<PB N="96" REF="64"><HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> for the Independent, and again&s;t the Presbyteriall way, will doe you little good, e&s;pecially if it be known what he wri|teth again&s;t Independency, of which, &s;ince you &s;ilently &s;mother it, I will make &s;ome &s;upply.</P>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>An expre&s;&s;e and cleare Te&s;timony of <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> again&s;t Independency.</HEAD>
<P>&mdash;<NOTE N="h" PLACE="marg">Quod tamen nullo modo iis &s;uffragatur, qui cen&s;ent unamquamque Eccle&s;iam habere po|te&s;tatem Independentem, nec probant plurium Eccle&s;iarum conjunctionem &s;ub directione Cla&s;|&s;ium, ut vocant, vel Synodorum; <HI>&amp; paulo po&s;t,</HI></NOTE><HI>Which notwith&s;tanding makes no|thing for them, who thinke every Church hath an Independent power, and approve not the uniting of many Churches under the direction of Cla&s;&s;es or Synods.</HI> And a little after he &s;aith;<NOTE N="i" PLACE="marg">Totalis, <HI>inquit,</HI> Indepenentia earum ab om|ni alia Eccle&s;ia minime laudanda, nec recipienda. <HI>Salmal. Apparat. ad lib. de Primat. Pap. p. 265.</HI></NOTE> <HI>Their totall Inde|pendency upon any other Church is nei|ther worthy of prai&s;e, nor of acceptation.</HI></P>
<P>And again he &s;aith,<NOTE N="k" PLACE="marg">Si eo tempore cum Spiritus Chri&s;ti Eccle&s;ias per Apo&s;tolos &s;uos regeret, ac dirigeret, non tamen eae Independentes fuere, quanto minus nunc in hac Seculorum extrema colluvie, cum tot haere|&s;ibus, qua&s;i loliis &amp; Zizaniis Eccle&s;ia tota inqui|nata &s;it, admitti oportet hanc Eccle&s;iarum &s;ingu|larum <GAP DESC="foreign"> ab&s;olutam; qua non debeant ad vicinos referre conventus cum nodus apud &s;c vi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">dice dignus inciderit, nec a concilio plurium Eccle&s;iarum &s;imul junctarum ex viciniae commodi|tate gubernari &s;u&s;tineant. &V;nit<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">s omnium toto orbe di&s;per&s;arum Eccle&s;iarum, &s;ub uno Pa&s;tore Chri&s;to, &amp; in unam Doctrinam con&s;entientium non pote&s;t con&s;tare ab&s;que communione, nec com|munio ab&s;que communicatione, communicatio au|tem nulla e&s;&s;e pote&s;t ubiom<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="2 letters">s inter &s;e &s;unt Inde|pendentes. <HI>Salma&s;. Apparat. ad lib. de Primatu Papae. p. 267.</HI></NOTE> <HI>If the Churches were not Independent at that time when the Spirit of Chri&s;t by his Apo&s;tles ruled and governed them, how much le&s;&s;e in this la&s;t</HI> colluvies <HI>of ages, when the whole Church is p<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tered with &s;o much cockle, and tares of here&s;ies, &s;hould this ab&s;olute &s;elf-ruling of all Churches be admitted<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter"> according to which, if they meet with a knotty difficultie, they may not referre it to their neighbouring conventions, nor will they be governed by an A&s;&s;embly of divers Churches, which vicinitie hath commodiou&s;ly united. The unitie of all the Churches disper&s;ed through the world, under one Shepherd Chri&s;t, and con&s;enting to one Doctrine cannot &s;tand without communion, nor that communion without communica|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">ation, which can be none where all are Independent on each other.</HI></P>
<P>And that this is the minde of <HI>Salma&s;ius,</HI> without impo&s;ing any thing upon him, or wre&s;ting his words to any other &s;ence then he in<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">ended, (as you doe) I am a&s;&s;ured by the Te&s;timony of a godly,
<PB N="97" REF="64">and learned Divine, of great integritie and reputation with tho&s;e that know him, who had conference with <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> in <HI>Holland,</HI> while his Booke was at Pre&s;&s;e (and where, counting the time of printing and accidentall paw&s;es it<NOTE N="l" PLACE="marg">Prodit ecce tandem no&s;ter de Frimatu Papae Tractatus, &amp; prima quidem tantum &s;ui parte, diu a multis expectat<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">, quia diu &s;ub praelo mor<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="pdcc" EXTENT="1 letter">s traxit, ob varias &amp; Sonticas cau&s;as, mode ab|&s;entiae meae, modo valetudinis, interdum &amp; alia|rum occupationum &s;aepius interruptus. Ante quin|quenuium excudi coeptus hoc demum tempore lu|cem videt. <HI>Salma&s;. initio Epi&s;t. Lect. praefix. Apparat. ad lib. de Primatu Papae.</HI></NOTE> con|tinued five yeares together) and told me that his &s;cope in that Booke was to oppo&s;e the extreames, Popery on the one &s;ide, and Independency on the o|ther, and to a&s;&s;ert the middle and mo|derate way of Presbyteriall Govern|ment.</P>
<P>The&s;e two quotations out of <HI>Salma&s;ius,</HI> the one a little before, the other the next page after the Te&s;timony produced by you, may give ju&s;t cau&s;e of &s;u&s;pition, that you meant to delude your Reader with a maimed allegation; omitting what made again&s;t you, by a fraudulent <HI>Aphare&s;is,</HI> and <HI>Apocope</HI> of the precedent, and &s;ub&s;e|quent words; unle&s;&s;e it be more like that you never &s;aw the Booke, but had the Te&s;timony &s;ent you in &s;ome piece of paper, which contained no more then you have made u&s;e of. Which we may the rather beleeve, becau&s;e the mi&s;takes were &s;o many in <HI>Salma&s;ius</HI> his Text, as could hardly have been if you had taken your Te&s;ti|mony at the fir&s;t hand.</P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
