<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>10-17-14</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>John Latta</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Added TEMPHEAD, checked ID, and added TYPEs to DIVs in order to validate. Proofed title page. Checked ^s. Reviewed structure. Checked placement and completeness of PBs. Checked for damage GAPs, #s, @s, --s, and UNCLEARs. Corrected [dollars]s. Checked spacing of foreign GAPs. Checked for EPIGRAPHs and ARGUMENTs. Checked for startqs, endqs, abq's, oes, qs, Ae's, and Qs. Checked proofsheets and made corrections. Checked I / J and U / V. Checked for CLOSERs, OPENERs, SIGNEDs, SALUTEs, TRAILERs, and BYLINEs. Checked decorated initials. Checked FIGUREs. Sample: 2 minutes. Proofing: 10 minutes. Tag review and corrections: 10 minutes. DONE.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="A89329">
<STC T="W">M2807</STC>
<STC T="T">E378_25</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99861910</BIBNO>
<VID>114056</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P><HI>MORO-MASTIX:</HI> M^r Iohn Goodwin whipt with his own ROD. OR The di&s;-&s;ecting of the &s;ixteenth Section of his book truly nam'd by him&s;elf <HI>HAGIO-MASTIX:</HI></P>
<P>So far as it fal&s;ly and frivolou&s;ly mentions a late di&s;putation in Chri&s;t-Church Pari&s;h, concer|ning the lawfulne&s;s of paying Tythes.</P>
<P>By a diligent ob&s;erver of the &s;aid Di&s;putation.</P>
<Q><BIBL><HI>PROV. 26.3.</HI></BIBL>
<P>A whip for a Hor&s;e, a bridle for the A&s;&s;e, and a Rod for a fools back.</P></Q>
<Q><BIBL><HI>PROV. 26.5.</HI></BIBL>
<P>An&s;wer a Fool in his folly, lea&s;t he be wi&s;e in his own conceit.</P></Q>
<Q><BIBL>TIT. 1.13.</BIBL>
<P><HI>Rebuke them</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>&s;harply, or</HI> (as Mr Goodwin renders it) <HI>cuttingly.</HI></P></Q>
<P><HI>LONDON,</HI> Printed for THO. UNDERHILL, and are to be &s;old at his &s;hop at the &s;ign of the Bible in great Wood&s;treet. 1647.</P>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="treatise">
<PB REF="2">
<PB N="3" REF="2">
<HEAD><HI>Moro-Mastix,</HI> M^r GOODVVIN whipt with his own Rod.</HEAD>
<P>_THe Title of your Book is <HI>Hagio-ma&s;tix,</HI> in your own Engli&s;h a <HI>&s;courge of the Saints.</HI> None deny your pen to be the &s;courge, but many doubt who are Saints. Surely the Saints you &s;courge are no Se|ctaries, your work is not to whip them for their fals but to wipe them from their foulne&s;s, when&s;oever they wallow in their impure puddles. Sir, you mu&s;t needs have a &s;weet Of|fice, and fine fingers to be boot-catcher in common to all the Sectaries, to make them clean when&s;oever they &s;tep into their mire of &s;in. I now under&s;tand the meaning of your complaint in the &s;ixteenth Section of your Epi&s;tle, where you thus write: <HI>My work sticks &s;o clo&s;e to my hands that I cannot cleer them of it:</HI> Sir, I neither envy your function nor your fingers.</P>
<P>Your book is called, <HI>The &s;courge of the Saints.</HI> Ill expre&s;t, had your book no more of the Scourge than of the Saint, it might ea&s;ily lodge in half a Nut-&s;hell.</P>
<P>Your book is the <HI>&s;courge of the Saints;</HI> and yet 'tis a &s;courge to none but Presbyterians. Reader, judge then who are the Saints by his own confe&s;&s;ion. Sir, the pray&s;es of your pen are as far from our liking, as your intending.</P>
<P>But we will take your own meaning, by Saints you mean Sectaries. Sir, where is mode&s;ty to commend your &s;elf, the ma&s;ter-Sectary of the City? if ordinary Sectaries be Saints, you are an Angel &s;ure:</P>
<Q><L>If that the man &s;uch pray&s;e mu&s;t have</L>
<L>What then shall he that keeps &mdash;</L></Q>
<P>But are Sectaries Saints? yes, in Satans Kalender; Saints <HI>per
<PB N="4" REF="3">antiphra&s;in,</HI> as <HI>auri &s;acra fames,</HI> as the whore is in the <HI>hebr,</HI> denominated from a root that &s;ignifieth to be holy, or as the Pope hath the title of holine&s;s. The&s;e late monopoli&s;ts of &s;anctity differ as much from &s;cripture Saints, old non-conforming Saints, nay, I am confident from &s;ome thou&s;ands of Saints in New Eng|land, as PERKIN WARBECK from the true PLANTA|GENET, a Stage-player from a King, a gaudy page from an high-born Prince, a morris-dancer from an Emperor. True &s;an|ctity I love, I admire as a &s;park of the heavenly flame, a ray from the &s;un of righteou&s;ne&s;s, the divine nature, a &s;lip of Paradi&s;e, the be&s;t &s;ute of the &s;oul, the fir&s;t fruits of glory, in a word, hea|ven upon earth, the &s;ubjects whereof I look upon as the truely excellent ones, &s;ons of the great king, heires of Immortality.</P>
<P>But bare pretenders to &s;anctity that have the Saints name and Satans nature, I think them as Apes and Monkies (tho&s;e <HI>ludibria naturae</HI>) by &s;o much the uglie&s;t of ereatures, by how much the thing excels which they imitate. A lying deceitfull Saint, a &s;e|ditious hereticall &s;aint, an unclean prophane &s;aint, a &s;aint of the new Edition, a Gangraena'd &s;aint; &s;aint Oates, &s;aint Gorton, &s;aint Lilburn, &s;aint Seeker, &s;aint Dipper, &s;aint Anti&s;cripturi&s;t; in a word &s;uch &s;aints as all along Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwin</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Vocat &s;e <HI>Ioh. Goodw.</HI> fauto|rem &s;ancto|rum, &s;ed in to|to opere per &s;anctos, &s;ci&s;|maticos &s;uos &amp; Browni&s;tas in|telligit. Ca+lumniatorille, omnes Ana|bapti&s;tas, An|tinomos, Arri|anos, nulla di|&s;tinctionefacta &s;anctorum ti|tulo includit. i. e. <HI>Iohn Goodwin</HI> calls him&s;elf the favourer of the Saints, but all his book over, he only under&s;tands by Saints Schi&s;matick, and Browni&s;ts. This Railer, without making di&s;tinction, includes Anabapti&s;ts, Antinomians, and Arrians under the title of Saints, <HI>Honor. Reg.</HI> pag 124. Yea, Mr J. G. accounts tho&s;e to be Saints, and &s;ayes they are holy and heavenly, who deny, that, God is one in three per&s;ons, <HI>Hagio-ma. p.</HI> 36. <HI>Sect.</HI> 27.</NOTE> canonizeth, the Saints here joyned with the &s;courge are but Aulchamy-chri&s;tians, pit-fals and gins in Religion, dung-hils covered over with &s;now, Bri&s;tol-diamonds, chimney-peeces. Sir, your placing your Saints in the Title of your book &s;eems to be a &s;ignificant Cere|mony, that they are Saints only in title, Citizens of the new, as the King of Spain is King of the old Jeru&s;alem. We &s;ee whom you mean by Saints, your complaint is, that</P>
<P><HI>The&s;e Saints have a &s;courge]</HI> You &s;hould have &s;aid <HI>are a &s;courge,</HI> and I am confident the greate&s;t that the power of god|line&s;s ever felt; they being the Tayl of the Dragon, Satans la&s;t experiment again&s;t the Church, his Ma&s;ter-peece &s;haped &s;ome|times to that exactne&s;s that if 'twere po&s;&s;ible <HI>the very Elect &s;hould be deceived by them.</HI></P>
<PB N="5" REF="3">
<P> You complain of a &s;courge, and we wonder not, the holy gho&s;t fore-tels you, <HI>murmurrers, complainers,</HI> and for the <HI>&s;courge</HI> you know, who it was that complained before you of <HI>torment,</HI> both of you, <HI>before your times;</HI> I fear your greate&s;t torture is that of your own galled-con&s;ciences, for any other we know none unle&s;s it be a &s;courge to you, that you may not &s;courge Chri&s;t more, the work of Reformation, the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel: your Bedlam Opinions de&s;erve the &s;courge, and were your &s;ins &s;courged no more than your &s;ides, &s;urely you would never complain. I confe&s;s &s;ome of your are &s;courged and payed very &s;orely, but it is with Pen&s;ions, with great Offices, and &s;ti|pends: &s;ure I am the little finger of New England, hath been heavier than the loynes of Old, their &s;courges &s;harper than our &s;corpions: con&s;ult with tho&s;e your brethren that were bani&s;hed thence into the I&s;le of Errors, (a place that Mr <HI>G.</HI> is in a fair way to &s;ee before he dyeth) and particularly ask <HI>Sam. Gorton</HI> whe|ther the whip wherewith the Civil Magi&s;trate made him to be whipt, was the <HI>&s;courge of the Saints</HI> or no? but the vomit of New England is food good enough for Mr <HI>G.</HI> and tho&s;e that the godly account Devils there, he accounts Saints here.</P>
<P>In the &s;ixteenth Section of the Epi&s;tle to the Reader you write to this effect.</P>
<P><HI>This generation having a faculty to make verball victories of reall di&s;asters,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Sect.</HI> 16. Epi&s;tle to the Reader.</NOTE><HI>importunely applaud their champions (which were four if not five to two) and congratulate their great &s;uc|ce&s;&s;e in a di&s;putation held in Chri&s;t-Church Pari&s;h, about the lawfulne&s;s, not &s;o much of the payment as of the demand of tithes by the Mini&s;ter.</HI></P>
<P>I mu&s;t take this lump of lyes in peeces.</P>
<P><HI>This generation</HI>]</P>
<P><HI>Generation,</HI> is a very comprehen&s;ive word;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Sect. Di&s;&s;ect.</NOTE> you are willing the Reader &s;hould doubt whether they be a generation of men or bea&s;ts, or if of men, whether they be fit to be nam'd with your &s;elves the &s;ame day; and the &s;cornfull di&s;tin|ctive addition <HI>(This)</HI> imports it. <HI>God, I thank thee, I am not as THIS Publican:</HI> you know the pa&s;&s;age, apply it. You cannot name the holie&s;t of your adver&s;aries without a &s;quemi&s;h diminution; the anciente&s;t and highe&s;t of ours in the &s;chool of
<PB N="6" REF="4">Chri&s;t, never got beyond the degree of a <HI>pretty man</HI> with you, the meane&s;t and younge&s;t of yours &s;hall commence <HI>precious, per &s;altum,</HI> even before they are &s;o much as pretty.</P>
<P>But what of this generation?</P>
<P><HI>They have one faculty</HI>]</P>
<P>No hurt in this, &s;ome of your generation have many faculties, and &s;ome of them none of the be&s;t.</P>
<P><HI>Many:</HI> One man hath a faculty to &s;ell chickens dead and alive, and to preach too. Another a faculty to be in his &s;tall &s;ix dayes in the week, and on the next day a faculty (though which is &s;trange, neither authority nor &s;ufficiency) to &s;upply Mr <HI>Good|wins</HI> place better than him&s;elf would have done.</P>
<P><HI>None of the be&s;t:</HI> a faculty to lye, libell, be hereticall and Bla&s;phemous, and yet, which is the wonder; a faculty to call them|&s;elves Saints when they have done.</P>
<P>But what is this generations one facultie?</P>
<P><HI>To make verball victories</HI>]</P>
<P>Why give you them &s;o much as the word <HI>victory?</HI> 'tis beyond the &s;train of your ordinary ingenuity to name this generation and a <HI>victory</HI> in the &s;ame breath, Presbyterians pur&s;ue victory (though, truth more) and cannot reach her: Sectaries flye from Victorie and cannot &s;hun her: <HI>victories</HI> fall into your mouthes as you &s;leep. Was there ever Presbyterian that had a Victory? though they non-plus you and make you yeeld the cau&s;e; yet I never thought they had the Victory till now.</P>
<P>But the Victories are onely</P>
<P><HI>Verball</HI>]</P>
<P>Reader let thy ingenuity be the judge, who are the <HI>Verbally</HI> victorious; the wordy men, the paper-performers of the times; not they &s;urely who being not &s;o prodigall, either of money or mode&s;ty, dare not maintain three Pamphleteers, to pen their weekly pray&s;es to the ends of the I&s;land, that &s;o the &s;mall print of a performance, may be turned into a great character by the &s;pectacles of a Diurnall: many a weighty merit of Presbyte|rians &s;inks to the bottome and lyeth hid, while the feathery &s;er|vices of every Sectary &s;hall &s;wim a top and be &s;een. Sir, we lay the brat of verbalizing at your own door, your ordinary pro|portion is a drop of truth to a &s;ea of words.</P>
<PB N="7" REF="4">
<P> But, what are the&s;e verball Victories made of?</P>
<P><HI>Reall di&s;a&s;ters</HI>]</P>
<P>Here the man is like him&s;elf, du&s;ty and mi&s;ty. If he means the Presbyterians make <HI>verball Victories</HI> of the <HI>reall di&s;a&s;ters,</HI> that they bring upon Sectaries it is non-&s;ence. If he means that the Presbyterians make <HI>verball Victories</HI> of the <HI>reall di&s;a&s;ters</HI> that the Sectaries bring upon them; let him &s;hew when and where the Sectaries brought &s;uch <HI>reall di&s;a&s;ters</HI> upon the Pres|byterians. The Presbyterians care not how many &s;uch <HI>reall di&s;asters</HI> they have, as they had at the di&s;putation at Chri&s;t-Church. Every week one as long as you pleas: it was &s;uch a di&s;|a&s;ter that made &s;ome of your faint followers glad to call for the <HI>aqua-vitae</HI> bottle of an <HI>hagio-ma&s;tix,</HI> to recover their &s;pirits, which yet being but &s;imple water without life, recovers none.</P>
<P>But wherein &s;tands the <HI>verbalne&s;s</HI> of the victory?</P>
<P><HI>In applauding their Champions &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>If you grant them Champions, we dare grant them their due applau&s;e; though I hope tho&s;e whom you call our Champions may they gain but people to Chri&s;t, care not for &s;o much as a &s;hoo-latchet of applau&s;e: it is better to have Champions with|out applau&s;e, than to have applau&s;e without Champions. It was your un&s;avory twit again&s;t Mr <HI>Edwards</HI> (not no where) that you had not &s;o much lei&s;ure to write as others, becau&s;e you preacht not to empty Churches: but tell me whether is it more commendable for a full preacher to have an empty Church, or a full Church to have an empty preacher. Chickens whether dead or alive are very good food for Sectaries, Smug the Smith or the Exchange-man are as good as the be&s;t with you. Sir, if we be champion-applauders, you are pigmee-applauders: but I do ill to tell you &s;o much of prai&s;ing your &s;elves, for it is the &s;tronge&s;t Ar|gument you have to proove the Presbyterians ill neighbours.</P>
<P>But why do they &s;o much applaud their Champions?</P>
<P><HI>For a great &s;ucce&s;&s;e at a Di&s;putation</HI>]</P>
<P><HI>A Disputation</HI> it &s;eems you grant it to be: but &s;eriou&s;ly you &s;tile it what I dare not, for every Di&s;putation implyes an An&s;we|rer: but I &s;aw much more of the De&s;pondent than of the Re|&s;pondent among you.</P>
<P><HI>For the &s;ucce&s;&s;e of the Disputation,</HI> Sir, call it not great in a
<PB N="8" REF="5">jeer: though it were not &s;o great as to boa&s;t of in regard it did not change your minds; yet neither was it &s;o &s;mal as to be a&s;hamd of, in regard (to u&s;e your own words) it &s;topt your mouthes. Great or &s;mall be the &s;ucce&s;&s;e, had it been on your &s;ide the next Diurnall &s;hould have trumpetted it out as far as Michaels Mount in Cornwall before this time.</P>
<P>You &s;peak of our great &s;ucce&s;s in &s;corn, and well you may, I confe&s;&s;e we have not the Sectarian way of &s;ucce&s;s; a Sectary and &s;ucce&s;s &s;eem almo&s;t undivided companions. Be his head ne|ver &s;o dull, his heart never &s;o unfaithfull, his coat never &s;o thread|bare, will he but &s;erve I know not what de&s;ign; &s;howres of in|vi&s;ible gains &s;hall rain through his crack't con&s;cience, and the man of guilt &s;hall &s;uddenly be metamorphiz'd into a calf of gold, and is not this &s;ucce&s;s? Sir, hone&s;ty is better than &s;ucce&s;s at all times; Sectaries are generally as far from a &s;urfet with hone&s;ty, as Presbyterians with money. Reader note this by the way.</P>
<P>But about what was this &s;ucce&s;sfull Di&s;putations?</P>
<P><HI>About the lawfulne&s;s of paying Tythes</HI>]</P>
<P>True Sir, and tell the Reader withall that Mr <HI>J. G.</HI> appeared there to Defend the Negative, <HI>The unlawfulnes of paying Tythes</HI> (for, el&s;e he appeared to no purpo&s;e) <HI>in Go&s;pel-times.</HI> A task &s;o odious that not without difficulty (as it is thought) an a&s;&s;i&s;tant was procured to Mr <HI>Goodwin;</HI> all &s;uppo&s;ing that Mr <HI>Cox</HI> was not there upon choi&s;e but taken up upon nece&s;&s;ity.</P>
<P>Yet Mr <HI>Goodwin</HI> (as <HI>Doeg</HI> when none el&s;e could be found) Ventures, enters, appeares to do his devoire as a re&s;pondent a|gain&s;t the lawfulne&s;s of that maintenance which the Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate hath &s;et out for the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pell in his Dominions; the wonder of which wickedne&s;s was the greater in regard that in his own judgement and con&s;cience (if any be left) he is beleev'd to hold Tythes lawfull; for, he him&s;elf for di|vers years lived upon the &s;aid maintenance by Tythes in Norfolk &amp; yet he never, that I could hear of, &s;ince that time of his Norfolk-tythe-taking, made acknowledgement of any unlawfulne&s;s in, (much le&s;&s;e, made re&s;titution for) that publike and known cour&s;e. 2. Some of his own followers profe&s;&s;ed, &s;ince the debate, by way of Apologie for him, that his judgement was &s;till for Tythes as the Di&s;putants were; and will you (&s;aid they) blame a man
<PB N="9" REF="5">for not an&s;wering again&s;t his judgement. 3. I am &s;ure being ear|ne&s;tly, openly, and re&s;pectfully reque&s;ted by a Mini&s;ter, once, twice, and thrice, immediately before the di&s;putation began, to declare his judgement concerning the unlawfulne&s;s of tythes, he totally declined it. 4. In the di&s;putation he was driven (whither by force of Argument, or con&s;cience, him&s;elf be&s;t knows) to confe&s;s that for any Judaicalnes or typicalnes, it is now as lawfull to pay tythes for the maintaining of the Mini&s;tery, as for the maintaining of an Army, onely he &s;aid, &s;ome<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">He cals his Clients weak and in|con&s;iderable, by craft.</NOTE> weak and incon&s;iderable (or incon&s;iderate, I well remember not whether) people might think otherwi&s;e, which was a gro&s;s granting of the cau&s;e, even to the being pitied by his opponents.</P>
<P>Now &s;ir, re-collect your &s;elf, was it not enough for you, again&s;t your own judgement to endeavour the defending of a rotten cau&s;e, and having &s;ought God to direct you and the peo|ple in a right way, to re&s;olve to lead them in a wrong? was not all this, I &s;ay, enough, but that, &s;ince the di&s;putation, for the prop|ping up of your tottering reputation, in &s;tead of Arguments, as a Schollar to redeem your credit, or of repentance, as a Chri&s;tian to wa&s;h your con&s;cience, you mu&s;t needs publi&s;h to the world a fals and frivolous &s;coff, viz. that the two Arguments brought by your opponent, moved the matter in que&s;tion no more than <HI>two &s;illy Lambs could draw a waggon?</HI> Sir, my &s;oul pitties both your &s;pirituall and outward condition; the former for your ad|ding &s;in to &s;in, and giving no &s;igns but of a vain un&s;avory &s;pirit unto this day: the latter, in regard I fear the world will look upon you, 'till you repent, as &s;ins Solicitor, Satans brewer, a wal|king <HI>Am&s;terdam,</HI> the turn-key to every untruth, the City-I&s;hmael, the Attorney for a toleration, and a very Pandor to the lu&s;ts of the people. You add, that the di&s;putation.</P>
<P><HI>Was not &s;o much about the lawfulne&s;s of paying as demanding tythes]</HI></P>
<P>Truely &s;ir, I &s;ee your memory is as &s;hort, now, as were your an&s;wers, before; I affirm that the que&s;tion propounded was concerning the lawfulne&s;s of paying tithes in Go&s;pel-times; for I know no demanders of tithes that came to the di&s;cour&s;e &s;crupul'd, and had they been &s;o, I think they would not have
<PB N="10" REF="6">cho&s;en Mr <HI>Iohn Goodwin</HI> to have &s;atisfied their con&s;ciences, &s;uch a du&s;ty deliverer, &s;uch a fumbling re&s;olver.</P>
<P>You add.</P>
<P>There was nothing &s;aid in that di&s;pute but what had <HI>tantum for quantum. An&s;wer for Argument in full return</HI>]</P>
<P>By <HI>tantum and quantum,</HI> he means he gave as much as was brought; we never denyed but you gave as much. But, &s;ir, it had been more to your commendation to have given <HI>as good as was brought;</HI> it is true for the <HI>quantum</HI> your an&s;wers were &s;uffici|ent, but for the <HI>quale</HI> they were nothing worth: had you given us a bu&s;hel of pibbles for a cabinet of pearles, we could neither have blam'd your <HI>tantum</HI> nor your <HI>quantum:</HI> you &s;ee poor peo|ple, what you are to look for, from the&s;e men; nothing but quantity, mea&s;ure, words; Gorton and the Chicken-man are as good at <HI>tantum</HI> and <HI>quantum</HI> as the be&s;t of you. Sir, had your weight been more and your mea&s;ure le&s;&s;e, it would have done better.</P>
<P>You proceed:</P>
<P><HI>You know no man that came &s;crupul'd in the point, that went away &s;atisfied.</HI></P>
<P>It is a &s;ign you know not your &s;elf; and if you went not away &s;atisfied, you went away convinced, even to a cleer yeelding the cau&s;e: he that is convinced in &s;uch a que&s;tion, and is not &s;atis|fied, mu&s;t give me leave to fear, That his Religion begins at his pockets.</P>
<P>But if none other could &s;atisfie the &s;crupul'd people: Sir, why did not you then endeavour it? &s;ome think your own advantage is the rea&s;on why you &s;till de&s;ire to keep them under cure: Why did you labour to make tho&s;e who deny'd tythes out of weak|ne&s;&s;e to be weaker, and by &s;tifling your own con&s;cience to con|tinue their doubts? Sir, had a Presbyterian &s;ought thus by plea|&s;ing their humors to poy&s;on their &s;ouls, he would have been &s;u&s;|pected to have loved their &s;upper better than their &s;ouls; but we mu&s;t be &s;ilent.</P>
<P>You write on.</P>
<P><HI>Yet &s;ome of their partie, as if they were bound by their Co|venant</HI>]</P>
<PB N="11" REF="6">
<P> <HI>Their partee</HI>] Oh this word partie is a &s;weet word: I wi&s;h you would &s;pend more time in mending and le&s;&s;e in making your partie: &s;ome ob&s;erve that ever &s;ince your &s;elf could not get to be part of the A&s;&s;embly, you have been labouring to a&s;&s;emble a partie.</P>
<P><HI>As if they were bound.</HI></P>
<P>It &s;eems your partie is not bound: you break all bands ci|vill and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall; and you tran&s;gre&s;s all bounds; I am confi|dent, the Sectary that &s;natcht away his bond from his creditor, and then refu&s;ed to pay his money, thought him&s;elf not bound.</P>
<P><HI>By their Covenant</HI>]</P>
<P>And is it not your Covenant al&s;o? yes, but with this difference, you &s;ay that ourpartie think them&s;elves bound by it.</P>
<P><HI>To provide per fas &amp; nefas, that Presbyterians in all things &s;hould have the preheminence.</HI></P>
<P>For tho&s;e prophanely applyed words, that Presbyterians mu&s;t in all things have the preheminence,<NOTE PLACE="marg"><HI>Col.</HI> 1.18. It is &s;aid, that Chri&s;t in all things might have the pre|heminence.</NOTE> I leave your own con&s;ci|&s;cience to whip you: me thinks you might have &s;pared the per|&s;on of Chri&s;t, though you cannot his members, but 'tis your dar|ling indeavour to &s;light Chri&s;t; I be&s;eech you, Sir, con&s;ider whe|ther this prophane application of the preheminence of Chri&s;t drop not from his pen, who&s;e tongue, of late, openly uttered the&s;e words; <HI>I &s;hould be loath (or a&s;hamed) to &s;tand before God in the righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e of Chri&s;t;</HI> or fully to that effect. And for your &s;aying that Presbyterians in all things love the preheminence: Sir, I am confident there are thou&s;ands in this City of the Pres|byterian judgement, that &s;o as Chri&s;t might have the prehemi|nence, could willingly be as low in their conditions and E&s;tates as they are in your affections and e&s;teem; and that's low enough, I beleeve.</P>
<P>You proceed, <HI>They provide for Presbytery per fas &amp; ne&s;as, and are acted by the Maxime of the Con&s;i&s;tory of Rome, that which cannot be done in a way of right, let it be done in a way of expediency</HI>]</P>
<P>We are not the fir&s;t that have had this &s;lander, the ble&s;&s;ed Apo&s;tle &s;aith it was <HI>&s;landerou&s;ly reported of him.</HI></P>
<P>But, Sir, we can return it to you without a &s;lander, never
<PB N="12" REF="7">were there in the Church of Chri&s;t &s;uch <HI>patrons of expedience;</HI> you care not what cour&s;es you take to advance the catholike cau&s;e: you live as though faith had bani&s;hed fidelity out of your proceedings; I am confident there are of you that would go to <HI>Endor</HI> for a project; I could give many in&s;tances, take but two; your endeavour to &s;tifle tho&s;e holy debates, for keeping &s;candalous &s;inners from the Sacrament, that &s;o Independency might &s;teal away the more of our members (The rea&s;on by not no body, being given of <HI>a majes bonum</HI>) was this by right or ex|pedience? your importune urging upon Presbyterians, Lay Com|mi&s;&s;ioners, ageneration lookt upon as an abomination and as apo|chryphall hermaphrodites by your &s;elves; tel me, was this by right or by expediency? Sir, your <HI>fas</HI> and <HI>nefas</HI> help you no more than your <HI>tantum</HI> and <HI>quantum.</HI></P>
<P>You go on.</P>
<P><HI>The City is fild with a vapour</HI> (a report you mean) <HI>that Master Goodwin and his Colleague were not able to an&s;wer</HI>]</P>
<P>Now he &s;peaks out. Here's the ground of his griefe; the Ci|ty is fild with the report of his in&s;ufficient An&s;wer: he loves to be honoured before the people; had it not been for this &s;ame City-ob&s;ervation, we &s;hould never have heard of him; but friend, is there not a greater than the City who &s;ees you? think of him more, this le&s;&s;e; give glory to him by Confe&s;&s;ion, &s;eek it not to your &s;elf by Pertinacy.</P>
<P>For the Vapours you &s;peak of that fill the City, I know none &s;o noy&s;ome as tho&s;e that ari&s;e out of the bog of Mr <HI>Goodwins</HI> brain,<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">If his brain be not, rather Satans &s;moa|kie brew-hou&s;e, ven|ting out va|pours.</NOTE> viz. the Vapours of Here&s;ies and ungodly opinions; which have more ob&s;cured the &s;un of the Scriptures, and infe|cted the ayre of London, then all the Vapours and ditches about the Town; were it po&s;&s;ible to get a Bill of &s;pirituall mortality, I fear we &s;hould find few Pari&s;hes cleer of the pe&s;t of his opi|nions: alas poor Coleman-&s;treet, that &s;o long ha&s;t had within thee &s;uch a pernicious pe&s;t-hou&s;e to infect thee, &s;uch a &s;moakie brew-hou&s;e to choak thee. Yet again.</P>
<P><HI>I was once under &s;ome thoughts of penning the contents of the &s;aid di&s;putation</HI>]</P>
<P>I fear your minde was too good to hold: Re-a&s;&s;ume it Sir,
<PB N="13" REF="7">when you plea&s;e: Let us have an hone&s;t &s;incere Narrative of what was &s;aid at the di&s;putation, pro and con, and I a&s;&s;ure you my pen &s;hall &s;ub&s;cribe to the truth of it: But I pray write not in the Language of your &s;ixteenth Section. Put us not off with <HI>tantum</HI> and <HI>quantum, a Wain and a Lamb,</HI> the &s;tory of a <HI>Cock and a Bull;</HI> Tell us not (as here you do) that we had five again&s;t your two in the di&s;putation, when as, Sir, there &s;pake no more then you permitted and (I think) reque&s;ted; and I remember not five words &s;poken by any, by way of di&s;putation again&s;t you, but by two onely: people look upon the&s;e pretences as the catchings of one neer drowning.</P>
<P><HI>And I may yet write &s;omething upon occa&s;ion given</HI>]</P>
<P>To &s;ave your longing here is an occa&s;ion given.</P>
<P><HI>If I could cleer my hands of other work, which as yet &s;ticks clo&s;e to them</HI>]</P>
<P>Complain not of dirty hands, your fingers are fit for your function, <HI>aliquid haerebit,</HI> do what you can; and if your work be to make clean every lewd Sectary (as his groom of the &s;tool) it is as &s;tinking as you complain it &s;ticking: my advice is, that you would either &s;eek a better imployment, or be &s;ure of very good wages for this; let every Sectary be &s;oundly rated for the Sca|venger. I know not what your &s;tanding wages are, but Ma&s;ter <HI>Edwards</HI> tells us, you have very good vailes. Sir, you know, <HI>bonus odor lucri.</HI></P>
<P>Yet more anger.</P>
<P><HI>I &s;peak unfainedly, the two Arguments produced by the Pa|trons of tythes, throughly examined and lookt into, no more carried the cau&s;e then two &s;illy Lambs could draw a We&s;tern wain of twenty hundred weight through the deepe&s;t wayes</HI>]</P>
<P><HI>I &s;peak unfeighnedly</HI>] What a beggarly way of Argumen|tation is this, <HI>ip&s;e dixit,</HI> will do it among Sectaries, not among Schollars.</P>
<P><HI>I &s;peak unfeighnedly</HI>] And, that you do &s;o &s;eldome, that you do well to tell us when you do it.</P>
<P><HI>There were but two Arguments for Tythes produc'd</HI>]</P>
<P>Two are as good as twenty. We leave <HI>tantum</HI> and <HI>quantum</HI> to you.</P>
<PB N="14" REF="8">
<P> <HI>By the Patrons of tythes</HI>]</P>
<P>Here you play the &s;ycophant and becau&s;e you cannot an&s;wer their Arguments, you a&s;&s;ail their Reputation.</P>
<P><HI>Which Argum<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="missing" EXTENT="1 letter">nts being fully examined and lookt into, are no more able, &amp;c.</HI> or, <HI>now I throughly ex<GAP DESC="illegible" REASON="faint" EXTENT="1 letter">mine and look into them</HI>]</P>
<P>An in&s;inuation of the Rea&s;on why he could not an&s;wer the Arguments at the time of di&s;putation, viz. becau&s;e till now he did not &s;o throughly look into them nor examine them; well, if you could not An&s;wer becau&s;e you were taken on the &s;udden to &s;peak, take time (<HI>Sir</HI> you &s;til proceed; <HI>&s;econd-thoughts</HI>) to write.</P>
<P><HI>The two Arguments were no more able to carry the cau&s;e of tythes, than two &s;illy Lambs to draw a We&s;tern Wain Loaden with two thou&s;and weight through the deepe&s;t wayes</HI>]</P>
<P>And your An&s;wers, <HI>Did no more &s;tir the cau&s;e from their Ar|guments then a We&s;tern Wain laden with twenty thou&s;and weight could draw the two Lambs through the deepe&s;t wayes;</HI> and there &s;tick till I help you out.</P>
<P>Had the two Arguments been &s;o weak as you pretend, you need not have feared to have &s;et down your old An&s;wers to them in &s;tead of your new &s;ooffs again&s;t them; but hereby you &s;hew your &s;elf as audacious in &s;cribling, as you are tame in arguing and as &s;lenderly inhabited in the upper parts, as Cox your Colleague.</P>
<P>To conclude, my pen delights in di&s;cour&s;es of a &s;erious nature much more than An&s;wering you according to your folly; If you will in future publi&s;h the Arguments produced again&s;t you, to|gether with your own and Ma&s;ter <HI>Cox's</HI> an&s;wers made to them; I &s;hall indeavour in my reply (which I promi&s;e may I procure the con&s;ent of your opponents) to agree with you in what &s;hall be &s;ound &s;incerely written by you, and to do my be&s;t to help your memory in what you &s;hall be &s;hort: I pray let the world once &s;ee that it is po&s;&s;ible for Mr <HI>Goodwin</HI> to write with|out bring beholding to his <HI>quaternion</HI> of advantages above other men, viz. <HI>lying,</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>J. Goodwinus</HI> Creten&s;ium mendaci&s;&s;i|mus, quem omnes norunt &s;olis calumniis et maledicen do nobilem. i.e. <HI>J. Goodwin</HI> is of all the lying Cretians the greate&s;t Lyer, and one whomal know to be famous for nothing but &s;landring and reviling. <HI>Hom. Reg.</HI> p. 22.</NOTE><HI>reviling, here&s;ies,</HI> and <HI>prophanation of Scrip|ture;</HI> for the expunging of which four, were there made an <HI>Index Expurgatorius</HI> to your former works, I fear there would be twenty leaves obliterated for one remaining written: Sir,
<PB N="15" REF="8">the con&s;i&s;tency of the&s;e things with the power of godline&s;s is one of the harde&s;t riddles that ever was propounded to the &s;ons either of high or low Presbytery.</P>
<P>Some think the advice that was given by a Presbyterian for your Congregation to deliver you up to Sathan, contains with|in it too charitable a &s;uppo&s;ition, viz. that you are not delivered up to him already: for my part I am &s;o charitable, as rather to de&s;ire your delivery from him than to him, for I think you want it more.</P>
<P>For your bla&s;phemous twenty eighth Section again&s;t the Scrip|ture, backt with your ridiculous pamphlet cal'd, Acandle to light the Sun, I &s;hall (as yet) only &s;ay thus much concerning it, <HI>Light</HI> and <HI>heat</HI> mu&s;t not be parted: your &s;aid Section wants a candle to give fire to it more than to give light to it, and ere long I hope that <HI>Gregories</HI> hand &s;hall be the Candle&s;tick.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
