<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2011-10-21</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Lauren Proux</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Checklist: x Add TEMPHEAD, change DATE, validate x Add DIV TYPEs, validate x Review structure, use BODY or rarely GROUP x Check PB placement and completeness, ensure sequence of N="" x Proof title page(s) x Check HEAD TRAILER ARGUMENT EPIGRAPH OPENER CLOSER SIGNED SALUTE BYLINE x Check ^, oe, abq (Esq;), italic I / J, _Initals, &amp;c. x Check # @ -- UNCLEAR LB FIGURE x Check q; startq endq Q&#62; x Correct illegibles from proofsheet x Check illegible page, para, line, span, word, dollar signs 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="A93884">
<STC T="W">S5491</STC>
<STC T="T">E20_7</STC>
<BIBNO T="umi">99872213</BIBNO>
<VID>124638</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<FRONT>
<DIV1 TYPE="title page">
<PB REF="1" MS="y">
<P>The Second Part of the <HI>D&V;PLY</HI> TO M. S. alias Two Brethren.</P>
<P>WHEREIN Are
<LIST>
<ITEM>maintained
<LIST>
<ITEM>The Kings, Parliaments, and all Civil Ma|gi&s;trates Authority about the Church.</ITEM>
<ITEM>Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judica|tories.</ITEM>
</LIST></ITEM>
<ITEM>refuted the
<LIST>
<ITEM>Independency of particular Congregations.</ITEM>
<ITEM>Licentiou&s;ne&s;&s;e of wicked Con&s;cience, and Toleration of all &s;orts of mo&s;t dete&s;table Schi&s;mes, Here&s;ies and Religions; as, Ido|latry, Pagani&s;me, Turci&s;me, Judai&s;me, Ar|riani&s;me, Browni&s;me, Anabapti&s;me, &amp;c. which <HI>M. S.</HI> maintain in their Book.</ITEM>
</LIST></ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<P>WITH A brief Epitome and Refutation of all the whole INDEPENDENT-Government.</P>
<L>Mo&s;t humbly &s;ubmitted to the Kings mo&s;t excellent Maje&s;tie.</L>
<L>To the mo&s;t Honorable Hou&s;es of Parliament.</L>
<L>The mo&s;t Reverend and Learned Divines of the A&s;&s;embly.</L>
<L>And all the Prote&s;tant Churches in this I&s;land and abroad.</L>
<P>By ADAM STEUART.</P>
<P>Octob. 3. 1644. Imprimatur JA: CRANFORD.</P>
<P><HI>London:</HI> Printed for <HI>Iohn Field,</HI> and are to be &s;old at his hou&s;e upon Addle-hill, neer <HI>Baynards</HI>-Ca&s;tle. 1644.</P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="dedication">
<PB REF="2">
<PB REF="2">
<HEAD>TO THE Mo&s;t High and Illu&s;trious, <HI>CHARLES LODOWIKE,</HI> By the Grace of God, Count Palatine of the <HI>Rhine, Archidapifer,</HI> and Prince Elector of the Sacred Empire, Duke of <HI>Bavarta, &amp;c.</HI></HEAD>
<P>_IT is ordinary with Writers in their Dedi|catory Epi&s;tles, highly to extoll and com|mend the Per&s;ons and Vertues of tho&s;e, to whom they Dedicate their Books; for the mo&s;t part little heeding, whether the Prai&s;es they give them, be ju&s;t or unju&s;t, de&s;erved or unde&s;erved: And if any one chance to ask the rea&s;on, they u&s;ually an&s;wer, That they Characterize and Paint them out, much like <HI>Xenophon</HI> his <HI>Cyrus;</HI> not al|together &s;uch, as they are, but as they &s;hould be: As
<PB REF="3">for my &s;elf, I may &s;afely and ingenuou&s;ly &s;ay, that I am very far from the&s;e mens cour&s;es, or any thing at all, that looketh that way: My main aym hereby, is rather to declare unto others, then to Your Highne&s;&s;e, the true Motives and Rea&s;ons, that induced me to Dedicate this Piece unto Your Highne&s;&s;e.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t and chiefe&s;t was, for that the Subject of this Treati&s;e, is concerning the Reformation of Abu&s;es, and the Extirpation of Schi&s;ms and Here&s;ies, in the Church of God: Now then, Your Highne&s;&s;e's mo&s;t Illu&s;trious Predece&s;&s;ors have been the fir&s;t of all other Princes of <HI>Germany,</HI> or el&s;e where that received the Reformed Religion in the greate&s;t Puritie of it; And not onely &s;o, but who from time to time have been the &s;ure&s;t <HI>A&s;ylum,</HI> and <HI>Refuge,</HI> to all the Saints of God, that &s;uffered for it, yea and a Terrour al&s;o to all &s;uch, as per&s;ecuted it: And this the great Forces, wherewith &s;o potently they a&s;si&s;ted the <HI>French,</HI> as al&s;o the <HI>States</HI> of the <HI>Low-Countreys,</HI> &s;o oppre&s;&s;ed by tho&s;e, who &s;o unju&s;tly have oppre&s;&s;ed Your Highne&s;&s;e, manife&s;teth &s;o abund|antly, that whoever knoweth it not, mu&s;t be born, and bred with the <HI>Antipodes,</HI> and be altogether a Stranger in the whole Chri&s;tian World. What al&s;o tho&s;e Illu&s;trious Princes of ble&s;&s;ed Memory, Your Father, and Grand-Father, did for the old Duke of <HI>Bouillion,</HI> in all Chri&s;tian, Civill, and Military Vertues, the very Hero's of His time, I my &s;elf and many others, have bin Eye-witne&s;&s;es. And as for Your Princely Vertues, I know, that Your
<PB REF="3">Highne&s;&s;e taketh no plea&s;ure to hear them &s;o highly commended, as they merit; neither is my Pen able to do it; and if I &s;hould attempt any &s;uch thing, I am a&s;&s;u|red, I &s;hould come as far &s;hort, as he, who would go about to Paint the Sun with a Coal: Neverthele&s;&s;e, this I hold my &s;elf bound to &s;ay unto the World, That I have heard &s;undry of the prime men of this <HI>I&s;land,</HI> both Noblemen, and Eccle&s;ia&s;tiques, yea, tho&s;e of the mo&s;t Learned and Godly of them, extoll very Highly Your Princely Vertues; and it is no &s;mall prai&s;e and commendation to be prai&s;ed and commended by tho&s;e, who them&s;elves are &s;o prai&s;e worthy and commendable. To whom then &s;hould I rather Dedicate this Book, that concerneth Reformation, then to his Highne&s;&s;e, who&s;e Illu&s;trious Ance&s;tors are &s;o celebrated in all Hi&s;tories, for promoting of the ble&s;&s;ed Work of Re|formation? And this, as I &s;aid before, God knoweth, I &s;ay not to flatter Your Highne&s;&s;e; but to the end, that Your Highne&s;&s;e having &s;o great and worthy Examples of &s;o Heroick Vertues, and tho&s;e not far &s;ought, but found at home, you may thereby be encouraged again&s;t all difficulties, to go on in that Royall Way, that they have &s;cored out unto you: Your Afflictions verily are great, and &s;uch as I cannot think upon, but with a bleeding heart, and that no le&s;&s;e for our &s;elves, then for Your Highne&s;&s;e; for ala&s;&s;e! what a check, and affront is this put upon all the Prote&s;tant Churches, to
<PB REF="4">&s;ee Him brought &s;o low, who&s;e Predece&s;&s;ors put them &s;o high, even when they were at their lowe&s;t ebbe? What a di&s;honour mu&s;t it needs be to the three Kingdoms, to &s;ee the Kings Maje&s;ties Nephew reduced to &s;uch an E&s;tate? What &s;erveth our Alliance for? What e&s;teem can For|raign Nations make of us, who e&s;teem no more our own Blood? Truely, God hath put your greate&s;t Ene|mies very low; Some al&s;o, who formerly have hindered that &s;ea&s;onable A&s;si&s;tance, that we &s;hould have afforded you, are now them&s;elves on the &s;uffering hand; And who knoweth, whether this be not one of the pre&s;ent quarrels God hath again&s;t us at this time? Oh! that God would pitty us &s;o far, as that we could but once learn to pitty our &s;elves; then might His Maje&s;tie be a glorious King; we mo&s;t happy Subjects; and You, Right Illu|&s;trious Prince, &s;oon be re&s;tored to Your Ancient Sove|raignties, and Dominions, &s;o long, and &s;o unju&s;tly u|&s;urped upon You, by Yours, ours, and all Prote&s;tant Princes open and profe&s;&s;ed Enemy: And now it &s;eemeth, that God hath already prepared the way, if we could prepare our &s;elves to enter into it: We &s;ee how the Lord hath powred out his vengeance upon the <HI>Hou&s;e of Au&s;tria,</HI> and rai&s;ed up again&s;t it the <HI>French,</HI> who&s;e Predece&s;&s;ors &s;tand &s;o many wayes obliged to Your Highne&s;&s;e's Hou&s;e, and that of late memory, yea, in our own times: We have &s;een heretofore what hath been the King of <HI>Denmarks</HI> zeal in this Cau&s;e; and I doubt not,
<PB REF="4">but the States of the <HI>Low-Countreys</HI> would contribute as much, as any other, to put down their Immortall Enemy, and to rai&s;e up again their old Confederate, and deare&s;t Friend. If at this pre&s;ent, when other Princes are in Arms one again&s;t another, we could &s;erve our &s;elves of &s;uch an occa&s;ion, to make a Peace here at home, we might ea&s;ily procure an happy Agreement among&s;t our Friends and Confederates abroad; &s;o we might make our &s;elves no le&s;&s;e con&s;iderable every where, by &s;uch a Peace, then now by our Di&s;tractions, we are incon&s;iderable to all the World. But this I leave, and return to Your Highne&s;&s;e: In a word; my aym in pleading here, for a Reformation, is to let all true Pro|te&s;tants know, how this Di&s;pute is due to Your High|ne&s;&s;e; and how they &s;tand all bound in Con&s;cience, to take to heart the Cau&s;e of &s;uch a Prince, who&s;e Ance|&s;tors were the fir&s;t Reformed, and true&s;t Reformers, and who Him&s;elf, in the mid&s;t of &s;o many <HI>Temptations,</HI> &s;o con&s;tantly continueth in their wayes: If they &s;hould (which God forbid) forget &s;o great Services, that tho&s;e never &s;ufficiently commended Princes of Your Illu&s;trious Hou&s;e have done for the <HI>Cau&s;e of God,</HI> they could not but prove very unthankfull, both to God, and to Your Highne&s;&s;e: And yet in &s;uch a ca&s;e, mu&s;t not Your Highne&s;&s;e for all that loo&s;e courage; Your Cau&s;e is his Cau&s;e, who is All-Sufficient; And therefore Your Highne&s;&s;e will do well to ca&s;t Your
<PB REF="5">Self wholly upon him, attending his good plea&s;ure; and I am a&s;&s;ured, that Your deliverance &s;hall come in his good time; which, that he would be plea&s;ed to ha&s;ten, So prayeth, &s;o hopeth, &s;o earne&s;tly de&s;ireth he, who is wholly re&s;olved, in all &s;incerity, all his life long, to remain</P>
<CLOSER><SIGNED>Your Highne&s;&s;e's mo&s;t Humble, mo&s;t Obedient, and mo&s;t Faithfull Servant, <HI>Adam Steuart.</HI></SIGNED></CLOSER>
</DIV1>
</FRONT>
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<PB N="1" REF="5">
<HEAD>How great is, and wherein con&s;i&s;teth the Civill Magi&s;trates power, in matters Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, or concerning Religion?</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. I.</HI> The State of the Que&s;tion.</HEAD>
<P>_IT is an old trick of Hereticks, and Schi&s;maticks, that when the Orthodox Churches oppo&s;e their novelties, what they cannot get of the Church, they travell to obtaine it at Court; and therefore to arrive at their aymes they flatter the Princes of the earth, and the Civill Magi&s;trate, in crying up the Civill, and decrying the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power: and thus did the Arrians in former, and the Arminians in latter times, in who&s;e foot-&s;teps our Brethren the Independents at this pre&s;ent doe &s;eem to tread; and for this end they confound all things, yea what ever is well &s;aid, as may be &s;eene by this their &s;cratching, and biting at my words, travelling as they doe every where to confound what I have mo&s;t clearely written. Wherefore the better to &s;hew this Authors fraud and guile, and mine owne &s;incerity, I will here &s;et down what I &s;aid, and what he oppo&s;eth. Apol. Narr. in &s;peaking to the Parliament, nameth it, <HI>The Supreame Iudica|tory, &s;evere Tribunall, the mo&s;t Sacred refuge, and A&s;ylum for mi&s;taken and mi&s;judged innocence.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> The Parliament indeed is all this in Civill Cau&s;es, but it pretends no directive power in matters of Religion, by Teaching, or Preaching, or Iudge|ing of controver&s;ies of Religion; nor any executive power, that is intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, as in the Vocation, Depo&s;ition, and Su&s;pen&s;ion of Mini|&s;ters, in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Cen&s;ures, in Excommunication, &amp;c. which are meer|ly &s;pirituall; but only an executive, coercive, and externall power, which is not in, but about the Church, and for the Church, whereby it compelleth refractory men to obey the Church: And this Authority belongeth actually, and in effect, <HI>In actu exercito,</HI> as they &s;ay, <HI>&amp; jure in re</HI> to true Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trates; but to others potentially <HI>in actu &s;ignato &amp; jure in rem,</HI> till they become true Chri&s;tians.</P>
<PB N="2" REF="6">
<P>My Adver&s;ary here carpeth fir&s;t at the word <HI>arrogate,</HI> as if it were ever|more taken in ill part, and &s;ignified to a&s;&s;ume proudly to a mans &s;elfe.</P>
<P><HI>A. Stewart.</HI> But he might know, that being a &s;tranger, and having lived the mo&s;t part of my life abroad, I am now and then con&s;trained to take the words upon tru<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">t; yet for this word, &s;ince he hath put me upon the per|u&s;all of my <HI>Dictionary,</HI> I mu&s;t tell him I finde no &s;uch thing as he &s;aith; there indeed I finde the words <HI>arrogant, arrogantly,</HI> and <HI>arrogancie</HI> to be ta|ken as he &s;uch, but not the word <HI>arrogate;</HI> for it is turned in French, <HI>S'arro|ger S'attribuer, S'appropri<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">r;</HI> and in Latine <HI>arrogo;</HI> all which were taken in good part, before ever Independency was <HI>in rerum natura:</HI> but I will not let my &s;elfe be caption fly drawne from the que&s;tion, by this mans Grammati|call &s;ophi&s;tications. If any thing were here ami&s;&s;e, as there is nothing, it will I hope be &s;ufficient that I here declare, that that was never my meaning: I confe&s;&s;e they have more, and better Language then I; but I am content, that my Rea&s;ons goe as farre beyond theirs, as their Language beyond mine.</P>
<P>Afterwards in the &s;ame page, he accu&s;eth me of contradicting my &s;elfe, in following Propo&s;itions.</P>
<P>The Parliament has no directive Power by teaching, Preaching, &amp;c.</P>
<P>The Parliament is wi&s;e enough to know what is convenient for the Church.</P>
<P>I an&s;wer, and an&s;wered againe, That every young boy, that learnes his rudiments in Logick, knowes, that a Contradiction is only betwixt two Pro|po&s;itions, which have the &s;ame Attributes, which is not to be found here; for the Attribute in the fir&s;t is, <HI>having no directive Power,</HI> &amp;c. but in the &s;econd, <HI>wi&s;e enough,</HI> &amp;c. 2. Neither is it credible, that every man, who is <HI>wi<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">e enough</HI> to know what is convenient for the Church, has a <HI>Directive Po|wer therein,</HI> in <HI>Preaching, Teaching,</HI> &amp;c. for the <HI>Independents</HI> have many a|mong&s;t them in their Churches, who have as much Learning, three or foure daies before they be received to be members of their Church, as three or foure daies after; and yet before they were received members into their Church, how&s;oever they knew well enough what was convenient for the Church, had yet no <HI>Directive Power</HI> in it to <HI>teach,</HI> &amp;c. 3. A little after, viz. p. 34. &sect;. 2. this judicious Ob&s;ervator of Contradictions declareth ingeniou&s;ly, that he knoweth not what I meane by a <HI>Directive Power;</HI> and yet here he telleth me, that I <HI>contradicted</HI> my &s;elfe: but how is it po&s;&s;ible, that he &s;hould know that I contradicted my &s;elfe in that, that he him&s;elfe under&s;tands not: He knoweth not what things I po&s;e, and yet he findeth them oppo&s;ed one to a|nother. I finde him here oppo&s;ed to him&s;elfe, and in finding out a <HI>contradicti|on</HI> in my words, he <HI>contradicteth</HI> him&s;elfe, and &s;o taketh away this pretended <HI>contradiction.</HI></P>
<P>Becau&s;e he knoweth not what is a <HI>directive Power,</HI> wherein he founds this
<PB N="3" REF="6">imaginary contradiction, he &s;aith, <HI>A. S. &s;hould befriend my intellect, to tell me plainly and di&s;tinctly, what he meaneth by</HI> a Directive Power in matters of Religion.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Wherefore if I cannot befriend your <HI>Will,</HI> I will travell to befriend your <HI>Intellect,</HI> not only in declaring you, what is a <HI>Directive Power,</HI> &amp;c. but al&s;o in expounding all the termes of this que&s;tion; learne therefore, I pray you, 1. That the Civill Magi&s;trate, <HI>qua talis,</HI> is he who governeth the State, <HI>qua talem;</HI> I &s;ay <HI>qua talis,</HI> and <HI>qua talem;</HI> for it may fall out, that he who is a Civill Magi&s;trate to governe the State, may al&s;o be cho&s;en to go|verne the Church in quality of a Ruling Elder, &amp;c. but that he doth not, in quality of a Civill Magi&s;trate, for then he &s;hould not need to be cho&s;en to be a Ruling Elder; for in quality of a Civill Magi&s;trate already he &s;hould have had that power.</P>
<P N="2">2. Learne, that by the word <HI>Church</HI> I under&s;tand the <HI>Vi&s;ible, Militant Church,</HI> both <HI>reall,</HI> and <HI>repre&s;entative</HI> in Church Officers, viz. 1. In Se&s;&s;ions, or Presbyteries. 2. In Cla&s;&s;es. 3. In Provinciall, and 4. In Nationall, and 5. in Oecumenicall Synods; but &s;o, that it mu&s;t be taken &s;ometimes for the reall Church alone, as when we &s;ay, <HI>The Presbytery ruleth the Church:</HI> &s;ometimes for the repre&s;entative alone, as when we &s;ay, <HI>Tell the Church:</HI> and evermore, <HI>ratione &s;ubjectae materiae.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. Learne, that the word <HI>Power,</HI> which here is nothing el&s;e, but <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>pote&s;tas, authoritas, &amp;c.</HI> &s;ignifieth not; 1. Any Naturall Faculty or pow|er in the Predicament of Quality. 2. Or any Habitude, either Naturall, pur|cha&s;ed by our indu&s;try, or 3. Supernaturall, infu&s;ed into the &s;oule, by Gods bounty. 1. For the Power of Ruling, whether it be Directive, Imperative, or Executive, belongeth not to us by birth, as naturall powers; nor can we pur|cha&s;e it by our owne indu&s;try alone, as we doe Naturall Habitudes: nor is it evermore &s;upernaturall or infu&s;ed by God, as we &s;ee in the Civill Power a|mong&s;t Pagans; yea it is very probable, that &s;ome Preachers may have an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power, who have no Supernaturall, but only their aturall gifts. 2. And a man before he be called to a charge in the State, or Church, may have all the <HI>naturall powers or faculties</HI> of his &s;oule; and all the <HI>naturall, or &s;u|pernaturall habitudes or abilities</HI> that he hath after his calling; and yet not have that <HI>power to judge, command, and puni&s;h,</HI> which he hath after his calling; it hath no <HI>reall,</HI> but only <HI>an intelligible being,</HI> which is not to <HI>be,</HI> but to <HI>be under|&s;tood, conceived, or intelligible;</HI> and therefore it is no <HI>vvork of nature, but of rea|&s;on:</HI> and the maine rea&s;on of this is; 1. Becau&s;e the being of this <HI>povver,</HI> which is not <HI>potentia,</HI> but <HI>pote&s;tas,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>&amp; authoritas;</HI> as al&s;o that of the <HI>charge or Office</HI> to which it belongeth, depends upon a meere a&s;&s;ent of the under&s;tand|ing, and de&s;tination of the will, in tho&s;e who choo&s;e the per&s;on or per&s;ons to this charge and power, and of him who is &s;o cho&s;en. Now the <HI>a&s;&s;ent of the
<PB N="4" REF="7">under&s;tanding and de&s;tination of the vvill,</HI> (&s;ince they are immanent actions, and no wayes tran&s;ient) cannot produce any reall or permanent effect out of them&s;elves: And yet however it be no <HI>reall faculty, habitude or ability, yet both can it po&s;e, and</HI> indeed it doth pre&s;uppo&s;e <HI>&s;ome reall being:</HI> for in puni&s;h|ing of Malefactours it po&s;eth &s;ometimes a very <HI>reall eff ct,</HI> as that of burning and hanging of per&s;ons; and before it be, it <HI>pre&s;uppo&s;eth the naturall faculties of the &s;oule,</HI> &s;ome <HI>naturall habitudes or abilities therein, as that of juri&s;prudence, in Civill Magi&s;trates and Iudges:</HI> &s;ometimes &s;ome <HI>&s;upernaturall habitudes al&s;o,</HI> as that of divine faith. <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall charges, as in Apo&s;tles, Prophets, Evan|geli&s;ts, and Pa&s;tors.</HI> 2. Becau&s;e a man in receiving of &s;uch a <HI>Povver, pote&s;tas or charge,</HI> findes no <HI>reall changement</HI> in him&s;elfe, as in receiving of a new <HI>reall being, or quality.</HI></P>
<P>No more can it formally con&s;i&s;t in the reall being, qualities, or effects, that the charge or this power produceth; for they are all po&s;terior to it.</P>
<P>So it may be defined a worke of rea&s;on, or a morall being, whereby he who is &s;ufficiently called, by &s;ufficient a&s;&s;ent and de&s;tination of the Will of tho&s;e who call him, and con&s;ent of his own, and endowed with &s;ufficient abilities, may ju&s;tly exerci&s;e &s;uch acts as they intend by &s;uch a calling. I call it, 1. a work of Rea&s;on, &amp;c. to the exclu&s;ion of the works of Nature. 2. I &s;ay, He who is called. Here you have, 1. the Subject of this power, viz. <HI>He.</HI> 2. The efficient cau&s;e thereof, &s;omewhat ob&s;curely expre&s;&s;ed, by &s;ufficient Calling; and afterward, 3. more di&s;tinctly, by the <HI>a&s;&s;ent and de&s;tination of the will of tho&s;e who call him, and con&s;ent of the per&s;on called.</HI> 4. <HI>Endowed, &amp;c.</HI> Here is expre&s;&s;ed the <HI>fundamentum remotum</HI> of this charge, whereby he is enabled to the acts of this power. 5. <HI>May ju&s;tly exerci&s;e, &amp;c.</HI> Here is the <HI>finis,</HI> or act of this power, wherein we have to ob&s;erve, that this act may be con&s;idered, 1. in its natura|litie; 2. In its habitualitie or facultie; 3. In its moralitie; 4. In its particular legalitie. The fir&s;t is from the naturall faculties of the Soule; The &s;econd, from the habitudes or abilities thereof; The third is from morall habitudes in the Will: The fourth from this <HI>pote&s;tas;</HI> the naturall facultie maketh it an act; the habitudes or abilities, an habituall act, or ea&s;ily produced by the &s;oul, if it be meerly naturall: (but if it be a &s;upernaturall act, <HI>quoad &s;ub&s;tantiam,</HI> then there mu&s;t be &s;ome &s;upernatural habitude, that &s;upplieth the place both of the deficient facultie, and habitude or abilitie) the vertue of ju&s;tice in the will, i. a ju&s;t act: but this morall power, or <GAP DESC="foreign">, maketh it a legall and publique act, for what before his calling he could not doe, but illegally, (how|&s;oever he had abilities enough) now after his calling, he can doe legally. <HI>Item,</HI> this morall power induceth a morall obligation to obedience, which all his na|turall powers, all his naturall and &s;upernaturall habitudes, and all his parti|cular morall vertues and ju&s;tice, could not doe without it.</P>
<P>This morall power is either private or particular, as the Paternall, Maritall,
<PB N="5" REF="7">(if it be meerly morall) and de&s;poticall, in dome&s;ticall and &s;uch like &s;ocieties, whereof we &s;peak not; Or publique, as that of the Secular Magi&s;trate, and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudge: and evermore it produceth an obligation unto obedi|ence in tho&s;e that are &s;ubject thereunto: So the power of the Civill Magi&s;trate binds the Subject to Civill, and that of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;ons, the people to Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall or &s;pirituall obedience; That of the Husband, the Wife, to conjugall; that of the Father, the Sonne, to filiall; and that of the Lord, the &s;ervant, to &s;ervile obedience or &s;ervice.</P>
<P>This power, as it is in Church-Officers, is either <HI>Directive</HI> or <HI>Executive,</HI> and this either <HI>imperative,</HI> or <HI>&s;trictly executive:</HI> Or if you like better of a Trichotomie, it is either Directive, Imperative, or Executive. The directive power of the Church, is that whereby &s;he &s;heweth us what is to be believed or done; which is done by Teaching, Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall judgements, Lawes, and the interpretation thereof, whereby we are directed and taught. The Imperative power is, whereby &s;he commands what is to be done: as, <HI>Hoc fac:</HI> which the Doctors of the Laws ordinarily expre&s;&s;e, by <HI>jubeo, impero, mando;</HI> and &s;ome Kings, by this; <HI>For it is our will and plea&s;ure.</HI> The Executive power is, where|by Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall judgements are put in execution; which is done by binding and loo&s;ing, in &s;ome wayes an&s;werable to di&s;tributive Iu&s;tice, remunerative and coercive.</P>
<P>Now to befriend yet more this Mans under&s;tanding, and to &s;hew the Chri|&s;tian Reader how fairly I deale with him, and all tho&s;e of his party, not hiding my &s;elfe, as they ordinarily doe, I give another note very nece&s;&s;ary in this mat|ter, which I hope &s;hall di&s;cover a great part of the&s;e mens cavils and frau|dulent &s;ophi&s;tications: and it is this: <HI>viz.</HI> That the power <HI>circa Spiritualia &amp; Eccle&s;ia&s;tica,</HI> about Spirituall and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall matters, is either <HI>intrin&s;e|call to the Church,</HI> i. e. not only about the Church, but al&s;o in the Church; as that of Church officers, which is only in the Church or Church officers, in quality of Church and Church officers; as the power to preach, to excommu|nicate, &amp;c. for no other but Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;ons can preach, or excom|municate; Neither can the Civill Magi&s;trate, or any other, exerci&s;e &s;uch acts. Or <HI>Extrin&s;ecall,</HI> i. e. about the Church, but not in the Church, in quality of a Church; as when the Civill Magi&s;trate maketh Lawes concerning the Church, in confirming or ratifying her lawes, in making them to be received as well in the State as in the Church; So <HI>Ju&s;tinian</HI> declared, that according to the Evangelicall doctrine and Apo&s;tolicall di&s;cipline, all men &s;hould be called Chri&s;tians; otherwayes that they &s;hould be declared di&s;tracted and infamous per&s;ons: and that they that were puni&s;hed &s;piritually by the Church, &s;hould afterwards be puni&s;hed civilly, by the civil Magi&s;trate: as we may &s;ee in the fir&s;t book of the <HI>Codex, tit. de &s;umma Trinitate, tit. de &s;acro&s;anctis Eccle&s;iis, tit. de
<PB N="6" REF="8">Epi&s;c. &amp; Cler. &amp; Orphanotroph.</HI> And through all the fir&s;t thirteen Titles of that book, and el&s;where in the Civill Lawes. But this power to judge, com|mand, and puni&s;h, is not Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, but Civill.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. II.</HI> The fir&s;t Conclu&s;ion about the Intrin&s;ecall power of the Civill Magi&s;trate in the Church.</HEAD>
<P>THis being pre&s;uppo&s;ed, I put my fir&s;t Conclu&s;ion thus: The Civill Ma|gi&s;trate, <HI>qua talis,</HI> or under the notion of a Civill Magi&s;trate, hath no in|trin&s;ecall power in the Church:
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. Becau&s;e the Scripture, which Independents acknowledge for the only rule of Church-Government, conteineth no &s;uch thing.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. Becau&s;e his authoritie, <HI>qua talis,</HI> is not Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, but Politicall or Civill, <HI>Ergo, qua talis,</HI> it is not intrin&s;ecall to the Church.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. Becau&s;e &s;uch mu&s;t be his power or authoritie in the Church, as the acts thereof, at lea&s;t <HI>in genere morum,</HI> or morally. But the acts of his power, as to puni&s;h refractorie per&s;ons in a Civill way, by impri&s;onment, pecuniary mulcts, &amp;c. are not intrin&s;ecall, yea no wayes Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, <HI>Ergo,</HI> no more is his power or authority.</ITEM>
<ITEM>4. Becau&s;e the authority that is intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, mu&s;t be exer|ci&s;ed by Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;ons. But &s;o is not that of the Civill Magi&s;trate. The Minor is certaine, becau&s;e it is only to be exerci&s;ed by the Civill Magi|&s;trate, or his officers; and not by Elders of the Church: as when he impri|&s;ons any man for his di&s;obedience unto the Church, or puts Apo&s;tates, or &s;ome abominable Hereticks to death, as <HI>Servet.</HI> &amp;c. And it is a certaine maxime, that, <HI>Eccle&s;ia ne&s;cit &s;anguinem:</HI> as may appeare by &s;undry Canons of the Ca|non Law. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The Major is indubitable, becau&s;e the power, and the exerci&s;e thereof belongeth unto the &s;ame &s;ort of per&s;ons.</ITEM>
<ITEM>5. Becau&s;e the Civill Magi&s;trate him&s;elfe, <HI>qua talis,</HI> is no Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;on, or Intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, &s;ince he may be a Pagan; how then can his authority be Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, or Intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, &s;ince the authority of a per&s;on out of the Church, <HI>qua talis,</HI> mu&s;t be Extrin&s;ecall, or out of the Church?</ITEM>
<ITEM>6. Becau&s;e the object of the intrin&s;ecall power of the Church is principally <GAP DESC="foreign">, things that are &s;pirituall, or for &s;pirituall ends; But &s;o is not that of the Civill Magi&s;trate; &s;ince oftentimes he knoweth him not, as when he is a Turk or a Pagan.</ITEM>
<ITEM>7. Becau&s;e this opinion confounds the Kingdome of this World, with that of Chri&s;t, in granting unto the Civill Magi&s;trate the Intrin&s;ecall power of the Church, which Chri&s;t only granted unto the Mini&s;ters therof, viz. unto Preachers, Teachers, and ruling Elders. But &s;o &s;hould it not be; for Chri&s;t
<PB N="7" REF="8">di&s;tingui&s;hed the&s;e powers, when he commanded to <HI>give unto God that which is Gods, and unto Cae&s;ar that which is Cae&s;ars,</HI> Mat. 22.21.</ITEM>
<ITEM>8. Becau&s;e the immediate rule of the intrin&s;ecall power of the Church, is only Gods Word, formally, by con&s;equence or pre&s;uppo&s;ition: &s;o is it not in re&s;pect of the Civill Magi&s;trates power, which is immediately and formally ruled by the Lawes of the State; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the Civill Magi&s;trates power is not intrin&s;ecall unto the Church.</ITEM>
<ITEM>9. The intrin&s;ecall power of the Church is only Mini&s;teriall, no wayes De|&s;poticall, Imperiall, Regall, Maje&s;ticall, or Maje&s;tie: So is not that of the Civill Magi&s;trate, in taking the word in a large &s;ignification, as it is &s;ome|times, for the &s;upreme and &s;ubalterne Magi&s;trate; For the power of the Civil Magi&s;trate, at lea&s;t in the Supreme or Prince, is not Mini&s;teriall, but &s;ometimes De&s;poticall or Lordly, &s;ometimes Imperiall, &s;ometimes Regall, &s;ometimes A|ri&s;tocraticall, &s;ometimes Democraticall, and evermore Maje&s;ticall. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The A&s;&s;umption is certaine; &s;o is the Propo&s;ition: for they who have this in|trin&s;ecall power in the Church, are only Chri&s;ts Mini&s;ters and Servants.</ITEM>
<ITEM>10. Becau&s;e (as we &s;aid heretofore) not only the Civill Magi&s;trate &s;ome|times is not a member of the true Church of Chri&s;t, but is a member of the Antichri&s;tian Church, yea &s;ometimes not &s;o much as Chri&s;tned, or a Chri&s;tian by name; as the Tuck the Emperor, the French King, and &s;ome others, who by maxime of State, have made &s;ome Edicts in favour of true Chri&s;tians, for the exerci&s;e of their Religion. But how &s;hall he that is not in the Church, that is no true Chri&s;tian, yea that is an Antichri&s;tian Chri&s;tian, yea not &s;o much as a Chri&s;tian by name, but an open Enemy to the name of Chri&s;t, as <HI>Herod, Nero, Diocle&s;ian, Julian</HI> the Apo&s;tate, that are externall unto the Church, have any intrin&s;ecall power in the Church?</ITEM>
<ITEM>11. Becau&s;e the Civill Magi&s;trate hath no intrin&s;ecall power, either di|rective or executive, in common Trades, as that of Brewers, Shoemakers, Car|ters, Watermen, &amp;c. who&s;e trades are within the reach of Nature, and which he directeth only extrin&s;ecally: Neither knoweth the King how to brew, how to make &s;hooes, &amp;c. neither can he brew, or make &s;hooes: How much le&s;&s;e then is it needfull that he have any interne power, either directive or executive, in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall matters, which are altogether &s;pirituall and &s;uper|naturall, above the reach of all naturall prudence, and quite out of the &s;phere of his activitie.</ITEM>
<ITEM>12. By the &s;ame rea&s;on the Civill Magi&s;trate &s;hould have an internall power both directive and executive, over all Oeconomicall Societies under him, viz. over the Husband and the Wife, the Father and the Son, the Ma&s;ter and the Servant. He might direct them in their duties, and execute their char|ges intrin&s;ecally, and &s;o doe the duty of a Husband, of a Father and Ma&s;ter in all things, in every mans familie, which could not but be found very ab&s;urd,
<PB N="8" REF="9">impious, and altogether intolerable. Heretofore the Independents did, as much as any men, complaine of &s;uch an ab&s;olute and independent power in the King: How then is it, that now they grant it?</ITEM>
<ITEM>13. If &s;uch an intrin&s;ecall power in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall matters, be a part of all civill Magi&s;trates power; then the Magi&s;trates who have it not, are not com|pleat and perfect Magi&s;trates, &s;ince they want one of the principall parts of the civill Magi&s;trates power, <HI>viz.</HI> The intrin&s;ecall, directive, and executive power in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall matters. But the con&s;equent is untrue, yea criminall, and trayterous; for many Pagans, Antichri&s;tians, yea in <HI>concreto,</HI> and in <HI>&s;en&s;u com|po&s;ito</HI> have a full and perfect civill power over their Subjects, and yet are de|&s;titute of all &s;uch intrin&s;ecall or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, either directive, or ex|ecutive; &s;ince neither they know nor will know the word of God, which is the only directive or regulative principle in Eccle&s;ia&s;tical matters &amp; Government: neither ever do they or will they exerci&s;e any of the&s;e powers; yea they re|nounce them both. Now morally he is not &s;aid to have power to exerci&s;e an Act, who never exerci&s;es, nor will exerci&s;e it, but renounces it, and all power unto it. <HI>Ergo,</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>14. If the civill Magi&s;trate, in qualitie of civill Magi&s;trate, hath any &s;uch intrin&s;ecall power or authority about the Church, Church bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, and Religion, then mu&s;t it not be called only a politicall, civill, or &s;ecular, but al|&s;o an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall and &s;pirituall power; Yea, the civill Magi&s;trate, and his po|wer, mu&s;t as well be defined by &s;pirituall and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall actions of di|rection and Government, and by &s;pirituall and Eccle&s;ia&s;tiall matters, as by civill actions and matters; for it is ordinary to define all faculties, habitudes, and all naturall or morall powers and authorities by their acts and objects whereunto they have any intrin&s;ecall reference, as <HI>vi&s;um per vi&s;ibile; audi|tum per audibile, Logicam per</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>Phi&s;icam per</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But &s;o is it not of the civill Magi&s;trates power, for neither is it called <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall,</HI> Religious, or Spirituall; neither is it the cu&s;tome of any learned Politician, who ever de|fined it exactly, to define it in &s;uch a manner. <HI>Ergo,</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>15. If it were &s;o, the civill Magi&s;trate could not be a good Magi&s;trate, un|le&s;&s;e he ruled the Church well; for in omitting this, he &s;hould omit the prin|cipall part of his office, &s;o not being skilled in Divinity, he &s;hould be unwor|thy of his charge, and worthy to be depo&s;ed, which I beleeve none but Inde|pendent Magi&s;trates will grant.</ITEM>
<ITEM>16. Yea, to be a true Magi&s;trate, and acquit him&s;elfe of his charge, he mu&s;t be an Independent; for to acquit him&s;elfe of the charge of a civill Ma|gi&s;trate, he mu&s;t rule the Church well; to rule the Church well, he mu&s;t rule it in the Independent way, (for Epi&s;copall Government is naught, not being &s;o much as e&s;&s;entially Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government, and Presbyterian Govern|ment, if they be beleeved, is nothing el&s;e but Epi&s;copall Government) to rule
<PB N="9" REF="9">it in the Independent way, he mu&s;t be an Independent. <HI>Ergo, a primo ad ulti|mum,</HI> to be a true or lawfull Magi&s;trate, he mu&s;t be an Independent: This, for any thing I can &s;ee, falleth very little &s;hort of Trea&s;on, <HI>for</HI> how&s;oever happi|ly they intend it not, yet they tend as fa&s;t as they can to it.</ITEM>
<ITEM>17. That morall power, whereof the externall acts are morally impo&s;&s;ible, is morally impo&s;&s;ible: But &s;uch is that intrin&s;ecall power in the civill Ma|gi&s;trate, about Spirituall matters in the Government of the Church, <HI>Ergo,</HI> That intrin&s;ecall power. &amp;c. mu&s;t be morally impo&s;&s;ible. The Major propo|&s;ition is certain, for neither God, nor Nature, nor men in their right wits e|ver ordained any morall power, whereof the act is morally impo&s;&s;ible; for active powers are only for their acts, as for their ends; now if the end be im|po&s;&s;ible, &s;o mu&s;t that which is for that end, be impo&s;&s;ible; and if it were im|po&s;&s;ible to &s;aile, we &s;hould never build &s;hips to &s;aile with: I prove the Minor, for I put the ca&s;e there were an Oecumenicall Councell, as hath been &s;een in former times, and may be in times to come; then &s;hould it not be po&s;&s;ible for any Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate to put in execution, any &s;uch power over an Oe|cumenick Councell, unle&s;&s;e he were an Oecumenick Magi&s;trate, to who&s;e au|thority it could &s;ubmit: But &s;uch a Magi&s;trate morally is not like to be found. <HI>E.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>18. If the King and Parliament, or any civill Magi&s;trate be judge betwixt us, and the Independents, then mu&s;t the Independents &s;ubmit to their judge|ment and command: If &s;o, how is it, that again&s;t the Lawes of the Kingdom, and their own Tenets, they erect &s;o many Independent Churches without their permi&s;&s;ion and con&s;ent, and that the Independent Mini&s;ters of the Synod in printed bookes have divulged their judgments, upon the matters in debate in the Synod, and brought in &s;o many novelties in Religion, and all this again&s;t the formall Ordinance of both the Hou&s;es of Parliament, to which they pretend &s;o much &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion?</ITEM>
<ITEM>19. This opinion maketh all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power unnece&s;&s;ary, and &s;uper|fluous; for &s;ince the civill Magi&s;trate has an intrin&s;ecall power, both directive and executive to govern the Church, as this <HI>M. S.</HI> would make us be&s;eeve; what need is it, that the Mini&s;ters of the Church have any &s;uch power, for the civill Magi&s;trate has power enough to govern both the State and the Church? But the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power is not unnece&s;&s;ary or &s;uperfluous, &s;ince God hath ordained Presbyteries, and &s;ome in the Church to be Rulers, and others to be ruled: For it is a Maxime both in <HI>Nature</HI> and in <HI>Grace,</HI> that <HI>Deus et Natura nihil faciunt fru&s;tra, Ergo,</HI> the Independents opinion, whereof the&s;e ab&s;urdities follow, mu&s;t be fal&s;e.</ITEM>
<ITEM>20. Becau&s;e the Evangeli&s;ts, Prophets, Pa&s;tors, Doctors, and other Chri|&s;tians of the Primitive Church, would never acknowledge any &s;uch authori|ty in the civill Magi&s;trates, or obey them, as we &s;ee throughout all the Hi|&s;tory of the Acts, and of the Primitive Church.</ITEM>
<PB N="10" REF="10">
<ITEM>21. If Kings, Parliaments, and the civill Magi&s;trates have any internall <HI>Directive, Imperative,</HI> or <HI>Executive</HI> power over the Church, either it &s;hould be Supream and Soveraign, or Subaltern; if Supreame, or Soveraign, then we have Kings in the Church; yea &s;ome higher Offices and Officers in the Church, then that of the Apo&s;tolate and the Apo&s;tles, which is contrary to St. <HI>Paul,</HI> 1. <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. If <HI>Subalterne,</HI> then the King, and Par|liament, and all Magi&s;trates are &s;ubject to &s;ome Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, and are not &s;upreame Iudges in the Church.</ITEM>
<ITEM>22. If the Magi&s;trate have any &s;uch power, either the Supreame, or Subal|tern Magi&s;trate has it: But the &s;upreame has it not, as we have &s;eene; nor the Subaltern; for what rea&s;on, that every Ju&s;tice of Peace, yea be he never &s;o ignorant in Divinity, or never &s;o vicious in his life, &s;hould have power o|ver a whole Nationall or Oecumenicall Synod? It is not po&s;&s;ible, for he has no power over all the Churches that they repre&s;ent; neither did ever all the Churches &s;end their Commi&s;&s;ioners to the Synod upon any &s;uch tearmes; nei|ther has it ever been acknowledged by any Synod; how ridiculous were it to think, that every Ju&s;tice of Peace, who has not &s;o much liberty as to enter in to this pre&s;ent Synod, &s;hould notwith&s;tanding rule it, or domineer over it? Neither did ye grant &s;o much authority, as I beleeve, to the civill Magi&s;trate in your Synod in the Netherlands. But what rea&s;on is it that the &s;ubalterne Magi&s;trate of one Towne, &s;hould rule over the Synod, rather then the Magi&s;trate of the Towne from whence is &s;ent an other Commi&s;&s;ioner?</ITEM>
<ITEM>23. If the civill Magi&s;trates or any King <HI>qua talis,</HI> be a Ruler of the Church, or have any intrin&s;ecall authoritative power to rule it, he &s;hould have the &s;ame right to it, that he hath to the State or Kingdome: &s;o &s;ome Kings (as in Hereditarie Kingdoms) &s;hould be Kings and rulers of the Church by birth.</ITEM>
<ITEM>24. Some by Warre, Inva&s;ion or u&s;urpation, which is a pretty way to ob|tain power in the Church.</ITEM>
<ITEM>25. By money in buying of a Principallity, and &s;o by direct Simony.</ITEM>
<ITEM>26. By trooquing and exchange.</ITEM>
<ITEM>27. A Woman, &s;ince &s;he may be Queen, might be a Church Ruler, and &s;o &s;peake in the Church, which St. <HI>Paul</HI> directly prohibiteth them.</ITEM>
<ITEM>28. A Prince, being a known Athei&s;t, or a Magician, &s;hould have an inter|nall power to rule the Church, and &s;o be a member thereof; for his Athei&s;me and Magick could no more hinder him from being a Ruler in the Church, then in the State: Neither is it po&s;&s;ible, that the Ruler of a Church or of any o|ther Society &s;hould not be a member thereof; if &s;o, the Church &s;hould be very well guided, and have holy members: But this is again&s;t the principles of Inde|pendency, for they will acknowledge no man for a Member of their Church, unle&s;&s;e it appeare, that he have the power of Piety and of Sanctifying Grace,</ITEM>
<PB N="11" REF="10">
<ITEM>29. Children, and Babes, who may be Kings, &s;hould be Rulers of the Church: So they, who have not the u&s;e of rea&s;on, &s;hould rule the Church without rea&s;on.</ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<P>And if it be replied, that they might guide the Church by their Coun&s;ell, and other Officers:</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. God is not &s;erved by Commi&s;&s;ioners and Proctors, in the Church as in the State: Whatever charge God layeth upon Church-men, they mu&s;t carrie their own burden them&s;elves, and not lay it upon others. 2. By the &s;ame rea&s;on, other Mini&s;ters of the Church might doe the like, and &s;o they like|wi&s;e might be born Gods Mini&s;ters, as the King, and &s;o have need of no vo|cation at all; but every man, according to his phanta&s;ie, might exerci&s;e his gift of Prophecy, ju&s;t for all the world as they doe among&s;t the Indepen|dents.</P>
<P N="30">30. Yea, mad men might rule the Church, &s;ince their madne&s;&s;e hinders them not to be Kings, when they have right to the Crowne, &s;o might mad men be Preachers al&s;o: for if madne&s;&s;e hinder not a Prince or a King to be a Ruler in the Church, or any other to rule the Church; no more &s;hould it hinder any other Mini&s;ter to be a Preacher, &s;ince there is the &s;ame rea&s;on for them all.</P>
<P N="31">31. It is a commandement of the Apo&s;tle, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 3. That no man be ad|mitted a Iudge in Chri&s;t, Church, but after due examination, <HI>viz.</HI> of their life and Doctrine: But Magi&s;trates, and e&s;pecially the &s;upreme Magi&s;trate, in taking the word in a large &s;ignification, are not &s;o admitted: and &s;ome of them cannot be &s;o admitted, as Princes, who are Infants, mad, &amp;c.</P>
<P N="32">32. Who&s;oever hath any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power mu&s;t be called of God, as <HI>Aaron,</HI> Heb. 5.4. and Chri&s;t took not this honour, but after a lawfull vocation. But Princes and Magi&s;trates are not &s;o called of God, as <HI>Aaron.</HI></P>
<P N="33">33. He who hath any intrin&s;ecall power in the Church, mu&s;t fir&s;t accept of it, and have &s;ome internall vocation, before that he have it: But many Magi|&s;trates accept not of it, nor have they any internall vocation, as Papi&s;ts, who will not accept of it, neither have they any vocation to it.</P>
<P N="34">34. If the Civill Magi&s;trate have any &s;uch power, either he hath it, as a Ma|gi&s;trate, as a Chri&s;tian, or as a Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate. But he hath it not as a Magi&s;trate: for, as a Magi&s;trate, only he ruleth the State, and not the Church: and if he had it, as a Magi&s;trate, all Magi&s;trates, yea <HI>Nero, Julian</HI> the Apo&s;tate &s;hould have it, as we have proved. Not as a Chri&s;tian; for then every Chri|&s;tian &s;hould have that power, yea, a Cobler, as well as a King: <HI>nam quod convenit alicui, qua tali, convenit omni.</HI> Nor finally, as a Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate; for as a Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate, he hath no more then as a Magi&s;trate, and a Chri&s;tian: Now he hath it not as a Magi&s;trate, and a Chri&s;tian: for Chri&s;ti|anity augmenteth not the power of a Magi&s;trate, &s;ince it is not of the &s;ame
<PB N="12" REF="11">kinde: for if it &s;hould augment it, or increa&s;e it, it &s;hould be &s;ome part or de|gree of Magi&s;tracie, which is fal&s;e; Neither if it could be augmented or in|crea&s;ed, could it receive any increa&s;e, but either exten&s;ive or inten&s;ive, in its parts or quantity, or in its degrees: But &s;ince Chri&s;tianity is not a part or a degree of Magi&s;tracy, nor Magi&s;tracy of Chri&s;tianity, the one cannot increa&s;e or augment the other.</P>
<P N="35">35. If we &s;hould have a Toleration of all &s;orts of Religions, put the ca&s;e of 365. as <HI>M. S.</HI> wi&s;heth; and that the King were Iudge in all; then he mu&s;t have an intrin&s;ecall power in all tho&s;e Religions, and all the &s;everall Churches that profe&s;&s;e them, and con&s;equently he mu&s;t be a member of every one of them, and &s;o of 365 Religions: For, who&s;oever hath an intrin&s;ecall power in the Church, or is a Governour of it, mu&s;t be a member, yea the principall member of it: But the King mu&s;t not be of &s;o many, <HI>viz.</HI> 365 Religons; <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P N="36">36. If the King be not of all tho&s;e Churches Religions, then either he mu&s;t be of one, or none of them: If of one of them only, then he &s;hall be partiall in judging and ruling them all, and &s;o an incompetent Iudge: If of none, &s;o in|deed he &s;hall be indifferent and impartiall, but a very dangerous man of no Religion at all: and &s;o cannot be a competent Iudge, unle&s;&s;e he be of no Re|ligion at all. But it were better to quit &s;uch a power, then to have it upon &s;uch termes.</P>
<P N="37">37. We have examples of Kings puni&s;hed for interpo&s;ing them&s;elves in mat|ters of Religion, which co&s;t &s;ome of them no le&s;&s;e then their Crowns: as we read of <HI>Saul,</HI> 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 13.8, 9, &amp;c. Others were &s;trucken with lepro&s;ie, as <HI>&V;z|ziah,</HI> for undertaking to &s;acrifice: And howbeit that before he had been a glorious and a triumphant King, yet for that act was he &s;trucken with lepro&s;ie by God, and oppo&s;ed by <HI>Azariah</HI> with four&s;core Prie&s;ts, valiant men, who thru&s;t him out from thence: &s;o dwelt he &s;everall in a hou&s;e, being a Leper; for he was cut off from the hou&s;e of the Lord. All this &s;aith the Text, and no le&s;&s;e; 2 <HI>King.</HI> 15.5. 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 26.16, 17, &amp;c.</P>
<P N="38">38. The Civill Magi&s;trate may be received unto the Magi&s;tracy, before he be a member of the Church: for the Independents receive no man, yea, not the Kings Maje&s;ty, and the Parliament, to be members of their Church, but after a long tryall: Yea, however they profe&s;&s;e the Orthodox Religion, and live Chri&s;tianly, not giving offence to any man, <HI>Ergo,</HI> in &s;uch a ca&s;e the civill Magi&s;trate is out of the Church, and &s;o mu&s;t his authority be, and con&s;e|quently, neither he, <HI>qua talis,</HI> nor his authority is intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, &s;o long as he is out of the Church; for the Magi&s;trates authority can be no more intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, then the Magi&s;trate him&s;elfe is.</P>
<P>And if it be &s;aid, that the Civill Magi&s;trates authority is intrin&s;ecall unto the Church, but not the Civill Magi&s;trate: I an&s;wer, That then the Church
<PB N="13" REF="11">hath the civill Magi&s;trates authority, and not his per&s;on; &s;o the Church hath the Magi&s;tracy, and not the Magi&s;trate, and &s;o the Church has civill, <HI>viz.</HI> Im|periall, Royall, or De&s;poticall authority over the &s;ubjects: But that cannot be &s;aid, for it is Trea&s;on; Chri&s;ts Kingdom is not of this world, and the Church beareth no materiall &s;word.</P>
<P N="39">39. The Intrin&s;ecall way to governe Chri&s;ts Church is convenient unto Gods wi&s;dome, &s;ince it is an act of wi&s;dome, and divine providence: But an Intrin&s;ecall power granted to Heathen, and Antichri&s;tian Chri&s;tians, and Ma|gi&s;trates, to govern Chri&s;ts Church, is not convenient unto his wi&s;dome, but repugnant unto it; for it is, as if he &s;hould choo&s;e a Wolfe to keepe the Lambs, and a Kite to &s;helter the Chickens, which are not meanes convenient unto &s;uch ends.</P>
<P N="40">40. Such a &s;ort of Government is repugnant unto Gods mercy towards his Church, for how is it credible that he, who has given Chri&s;t his onely Sonne for his Church, to redeeme her, &s;hould give her Antichri&s;ts and Pa|gans to leade her away from Chri&s;t to Antichri&s;t, yea to the Devill, and Hell it &s;elfe, from which he hath redeemed her.</P>
<P N="41">41. I might here aske what Magi&s;trate has this Intrin&s;ecall power; whether the Supreame, or the Subalterne? If the Supreame, then he has &s;uch an au|thority in the Church, as in the State, <HI>viz.</HI> Monarchicall, De&s;poticall, Im|periall, Royall, &amp;c. Ari&s;tocraticall, or Democraticall; &s;o the Government of the Church is not one, but manifold, and may change, and be diver&s;ified, as the governments of this world: If the Subalterne has it al&s;o, then it mu&s;t be derived unto him from the Prince or Soveraigne; <HI>Nulla enim pote&s;tas, ni&s;i in Principe, aut a Principe;</HI> there is no power, but in the Prince, or from the Prince, &s;o Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall charges &s;hall be venall or &s;aleable, as Subalterne Magi&s;tracies in &s;ome Kingdomes are, where the only way to be preferred unto them, is, that notable Maxime of old <HI>Judas, Quantum mihi dabitis?</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. III.</HI> The &s;econd Conclu&s;ion about the Extrin&s;ecall power of the Civill Magi&s;trate, in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall matters, proved by Scripture.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Conclu&s;.</HI> II. THe Civill Magi&s;trate hath an extrin&s;ecall, both Directive and Executive power about the Church, whereby not onely he may rule it by Politicall Lawes, as Pagan, but al&s;o as Chri&s;tian; becau&s;e he is, or &s;hould be a Nur&s;ing Father of the Church, <HI>E&s;ay.</HI> 49.23. who 1. is bound to admit in his Kingdome the true Church, and true Religion. 2. He has power, not to admit it, to reject it, yea when it is not received or approved, and confirmed by his &s;ecular and civill authority, to reject it, and exile it, however he do it not as a Nur&s;e of the Church. 3. If the Church be cor|rupt,
<PB N="14" REF="12">and Church Officers negligent in their charge, and will not reforme it, he may command, yea compell them to do it. Or if they will not, he may ex|traordinarily do it him&s;elfe. 5. When the Church is Reformed, he may command them, when they are negligent, to be diligent in their charge. 6. If they oppre&s;&s;e any man in their Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall judgements and cen&s;ures, again&s;t the Lawes of the Kingdome, he may de&s;ire them, yea, command them to re|vi&s;e their judgements; and in ca&s;e they reforme them not, command them, yea compell them by his civill power, to give him &s;atisfaction, according to the Lawes of the Kingdome, if they derogate not from the Law of God. 7. He may, yea he is bound to provide &s;ufficient maintenance for the Mini&s;ters of the Churches, and to take a care that their meanes be not delapidated, and that they be not Sacrilegiou&s;ly robbed of them. 8. And what here I &s;ay of the Church, I &s;ay al&s;o of Univer&s;ities and Schooles, that are the Seminaries of able men for the Church. 9. He may grant unto the Church &s;ome Liberties, Priviledges, or Immunities, as &s;undry Princes have done, and confirme them by Law, as we &s;ee in the Civill Law. 10. He is bound with his Civill power to maintaine the Order, and Di&s;cipline of the Church; and con&s;equently: 11. To hinder all di&s;order in it. And 12. By his Civill Authority, to com|pell all refractory per&s;ons to obey the Church. And 13. To bani&s;h, and exile all Sects, Schi&s;mes, and Here&s;ies, as we may &s;ee by &s;undry of the Roman Lawes, and e&s;pecially in the fir&s;t 13. Titles of the fir&s;t booke of <HI>In&s;tinians</HI> Codex, in the Pandects and el&s;e where. All this we grant to the Civill Ma|gi&s;trate; and if the <HI>Quinq Eccle&s;ian</HI> Mini&s;ters with the re&s;t of that Sect con|te&s;t it not, we need not to prove it; only we &s;ay, that he doth all this by a Civill and Secular, Supreame, Imperiall, Royall, Ari&s;tocraticall, or Democra|ticall, Legi&s;lative, and coactive Power, armed with the &s;word, how&s;oever extrin&s;ecall to the Church; but more Ab&s;olute, Independent, and Potent <HI>in &s;uo genere,</HI> then any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power what&s;oever, which is Intrin&s;ecall to the Church, which is no waies Ab&s;olute, nor Independent, but Dependent; no waies Coactive by Externall force, but Spirituall, meerly Mini&s;teriall (how&s;o|ever imperative in the name of God) that cannot make any Lawes, but of things meerely Circum&s;tantiall, much le&s;&s;e abrogate the Lawes concerning the con|&s;titution, and Government of the Church, already made by God in his Word.</P>
<P>Now that the Magi&s;trate hath an extrin&s;ecall Power over the Church, in compelling all refractory per&s;ons to &s;ubmit them&s;elves to her ju&s;t commands, &s;ince <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;eemeth to que&s;tion it, and de&s;ireth a proofe of it, I am ready to &s;atisfie his de&s;ire herein. Wherefore I prove it,</P>
<P N="1">1. From &s;undry examples of the Iudges, and Kings of the people of God, in the old Te&s;tament, <HI>Exod.</HI> 32.27. <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> commanded the Levites to kill about three thou&s;and of the Ring-leaders, or principalls of tho&s;e that ado|red
<PB N="15" REF="12">the golden Calfe; in the performance of which &s;ervice the Text &s;aith, that they <HI>con&s;ecrated them&s;elves unto the Lord,</HI> ver&s;e 29.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Deut.</HI> 22.11. to the end of the Chapter, we read how the re&s;t of the Tribes of I&s;rael re&s;olved to warre <HI>again&s;t Reuben, Gad, and the halfe Tribe of Mana&s;&s;eh,</HI> for building <HI>of an Altar</HI> (as they believed) <HI>in tran&s;gre&s;&s;ion again&s;t the Lord,</HI> which they would not have done, had they not conceived it to be ju&s;t.</P>
<P N="3">3. Iudg. 6.31. Ioa&s;h ordained thus, <HI>He that will plead for him,</HI> i. e. <HI>Baal, let him be put to death.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. 1 Kings 15.12. <HI>A&s;a removed all the Idols that his fathers had made,</HI> 13. <HI>And al&s;o Maachah his mother, even her he removed from being Queene, becau&s;e &s;he had made an Idoll in a Grove, and A&s;a de&s;troyed her Idoll, and burnt it by the brooke Kedron.</HI> Here <HI>A&s;a</HI> puni&s;heth his owne Mother for Idolatry, and de&s;troyeth her Idoll: &s;o no doubt may the Civill Magi&s;trate doe with all fal&s;e <HI>Doctrine, Wor&s;hip,</HI> and <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> fal&s;e <HI>Doctors, Wor&s;hippers,</HI> and <HI>Church Governours;</HI> he may aboli&s;h them, and puni&s;h their per&s;ons, according to the quality of their fal&s;e <HI>Doctrine, Wor&s;hip,</HI> and <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> and 2. Chro. 14.4. <HI>He,</HI> i.e. <HI>A&s;a commanded Iudah to &s;eeke the Lord God of their fathers.</HI> 5. <HI>He tooke away the high places.</HI></P>
<P>Chap. 15.12. <HI>They entred into a Covenant to &s;eeke the Lord God of their fa|thers, with all their heart, and with all their &s;oule.</HI> 13. <HI>That who&s;oever would not &s;eeke the Lord God of J&s;rael &s;hould be put to death, whether &s;mall or great, whether man or woman.</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. 2 Kings 10. from the ver. 18. to the 31. <HI>Iehu</HI> de&s;troyeth <HI>Baal,</HI> all his Images, Prophets, Prie&s;ts, Servants, and Wor&s;hippers, and this fact is highly commended, and recompenced by God him&s;elfe, ver. 30.</P>
<P N="6">6. <HI>Ieho&s;aphat,</HI> 2 Chro. 17. <HI>tooke away the high places, and Groves out of Judah,</HI> ver. 6. He &s;ent his Princes, the Prie&s;ts and Levites to teach through|out all <HI>Juda,</HI> ver. 7.8, 9. and Chap. 19. he reformeth the two Sanedrims, and e&s;tabli&s;heth <HI>Amariah the chief Prie&s;t over them in all matters of the Lord, and Zebadiah for all the Kings matters:</HI> which he could not lawfully doe without &s;ome power. Now we &s;hall &s;hew hereafter, that it cannot be Intrin&s;ecall to the Church, &s;ince he was no Eccle&s;ia&s;tick Per&s;on, <HI>Ergo</HI> it mu&s;t be extrin&s;ecall.</P>
<P N="7">7. 2 Kings 11.18. Under the King <HI>Iehoa&s;h all the people of the Land went into the hou&s;e of</HI> Baal, <HI>and brake it downe, his Altars, and his Jmages brake they in pieces throughly, and &s;lew</HI> Matton <HI>the Prie&s;t of</HI> Baal; this they did in vertue of their Covenant betwixt the King and the People, with their God; and it is approved in Scripture, as it appeareth by the Text.</P>
<P N="8">8. 2 Kings 18.4. Ezechias <HI>remooved the high places, and brake the Images, and cut down the Groves, and brake in pieces the bra&s;en Serpent, that</HI> Mo&s;es <HI>had made, for unto tho&s;e daies the Children of I&s;rael did burne Incen&s;e to it.</HI> Here not only is Idolatrie put downe, but al&s;o the High Places remooved, and the
<PB N="16" REF="13">brazen Serpent, a thing in it &s;elf indifferent, but yet <HI>ex in&s;tituto Divino</HI> &s;et up, put down, when the people abu&s;ed it in matter of Religion: Wherefore then may not the Civill Magi&s;trate doe as much with Independency, if it be found contrary to true Doctrine, Wor&s;hip, or Di&s;cipline?</P>
<P>So, 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 31. He reformed the Di&s;cipline, v. 2. and provided &s;ufficient maintenance for Church Officers.</P>
<P N="9">9. <HI>Jo&s;iah,</HI> 2 Reg. 23. <HI>put down the idolatrous Prie&s;ts, whom the King of Ju|dah had ordained to burne incen&s;e in the High places in the Cities of Iudah.</HI> He <HI>&s;lew all the Prie&s;ts of the High places,</HI> whether they were Idolaters, or not: for the Text here hath no di&s;tinction, and therefore it is not to us to di&s;tin|gui&s;h. So that no Kings di&s;pen&s;ation, Toleration, or command, can excu&s;e any man from &s;uffering, if he &s;inne again&s;t God, if the Magi&s;trate that &s;ucceedeth him will doe his duty.</P>
<P N="10">10. So <HI>Mana&s;&s;es</HI> reformed the Church, 2 <HI>Chron.</HI> 23.15. and 11.5. See the example of <HI>Ezra,</HI> Ezr. 9. &amp; 10. and of <HI>Nehemiah,</HI> Neh. 13.</P>
<P N="11">11. So did <HI>Nebuchadnezzar</HI> ordaine, Dan. 3.29. <HI>Therefore I make a Decree, that every People, Nation, and Language, which &s;peaketh any thing ami&s;&s;e a|gain&s;t the God of Shadrach, Me&s;hach, and Abednego, &s;hall be cut in pieces, and their hou&s;es &s;hall be made a dunghill; becau&s;e there is no other God that can deli|ver after this &s;ort.</HI></P>
<P>Neither need I to &s;peak, 12, of <HI>Darius,</HI> 13. <HI>Cyrus,</HI> 14. <HI>Darius Hi&s;ta&s;pes,</HI> 15. <HI>Artaxerxes,</HI> and other Pagan Princes, who imployed their Civill power about Religion, <HI>E&s;d.</HI> 1.1, 2, 3, 4. and 4.17, 18, 19, &amp;c. and <HI>Nehem.</HI> 7. We have yet &s;ome other examples, 16. of <HI>Phineas,</HI> 17. <HI>Heliah,</HI> 18. <HI>Mattathias,</HI> 19. <HI>Judah,</HI> and &s;ome others, who in quality of extraordinary Iudges, puni&s;hed Hereticks and Idolaters, yea &s;ome of them by death, <HI>Num.</HI> 25.8. 1 <HI>King.</HI> 18.40. 1 <HI>Macch.</HI> 2. 2 <HI>Macch.</HI> 36. Now howbeit the&s;e acts of extraordinary Iudges are not to be drawn into con&s;equence by private per&s;ons: neverthele&s;&s;e they are to be imitated by ordinary Iudges: for, what they did extraordinarily in re&s;pect of their calling, and in quality of Iudges, ordinary Iudges &s;hould doe it ordinarily, &s;ince it is their ordinary charge, as the others extraordinarily, and is commended in Scripture.</P>
<P>We have &s;ome examples in the New Te&s;tament: in S. <HI>Peters</HI> per&s;on, who in quality of an extraordinary Iudge, when there was no Chri&s;tian Ma|gi&s;trate, put to death <HI>Ananias</HI> and <HI>Saphyra,</HI> for their hypocri&s;ie and di&s;&s;imu|lation, <HI>Act.</HI> 5.5.10. How much more might he have done it for Here&s;ie, which is wor&s;e? And S. <HI>Paul</HI> &s;trook <HI>Elymas</HI> the Sorcerer blind, becau&s;e he would have &s;educed <HI>Paulus Sergius</HI> the Procon&s;ul from the &s;aith, <HI>Act.</HI> 13.8, 10. becau&s;e the Magi&s;trate did not his duty, or becau&s;e there was no Chri&s;ti|an Magi&s;trate in tho&s;e times. Now what they did as extraordinary Magi|&s;trates, not being ordinary, the ordinary Magi&s;trate may doe it ordinarily, as an ordinary act of his charge.</P>
<PB N="17" REF="13">
<P>We have al&s;o the expre&s;&s;e commandement of God, to puni&s;h the Idolater, Heretick, or <HI>fal&s;e Prophet, and dreamer of dreames,</HI> be he never &s;o neare to us, <HI>wife, brother, &s;onne, friend, &amp;c.</HI> Deut. 13.1. And the rea&s;on is, becau&s;e <HI>He hath &s;poken to turne you away from the Lord your God,</HI> v. 5.10. So, who&s;o|ever &s;educeth us from the Lord our God, as Hereticks, are to &s;uffer, if they be pertinacious; Yea, whole Cities are to be de&s;troyed for this &s;in, ver. 15. See <HI>Exod.</HI> 22.20. <HI>Deut.</HI> 17.2.</P>
<P>Yea, it was not &s;o much as permitted to the people of God to make any Cove|nant, or mariage with Idolatrous people, for feare of turning them away from Gods &s;ervice, <HI>Deut.</HI> 7.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. <HI>Exod.</HI> 34.11.15. <HI>Ezra</HI> 9.10. <HI>Nehem.</HI> 9. And this was &s;ignified by a prohibition, not to let their cattell &s;o much as gen|der with a divers kind, not to &s;ow their ground with mingled &s;eed, nor to wear garments mingled with linnen and wollen, <HI>Levit.</HI> 19. as <HI>Zepperus in Explana|tione legum Mo&s;aicarum foren&s;ium, l.</HI> 4. <HI>c.</HI> 2. expounds it.</P>
<P>We nave the Romane lawes, in the fir&s;t Book of the Code of <HI>Ju&s;tinian,</HI> through all the fir&s;t 14 or 15 Titles, and el&s;where, to this very Head.</P>
<P>So we have &s;olemn Covenants in Scripture, to ob&s;erve the Law of God, and con&s;equently the fir&s;t Commandement, and &s;o to de&s;troy Here&s;ie and Schi&s;mes, which are contrary to it: As (1) that of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> pronouncing &s;undry benedicti|ons to the keepers, and cur&s;es to the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ors thereof, <HI>Deut.</HI> 27. &amp; 28. (2) Of <HI>Io&s;hua,</HI> 23. &amp; 24. (3) Of <HI>A&s;a,</HI> 2 <HI>Chro.</HI> 15.12. (4) Of <HI>Joa&s;h,</HI> 2 <HI>Chro</HI> 23.16. (5) Of <HI>Jo&s;iah,</HI> 2 <HI>Chro.</HI> 34.30. (6) Of <HI>Ezra,</HI> c. 10.3. (7) Of <HI>Nehemiah.</HI> chap. 9. v. 28. and 10.1. to the 30. They <HI>make a &s;ure Covenant and write it;</HI> and enter into a cur&s;e, yea and that with an oath, to walk in Gods law, &amp;c. &s;o far were they from tolerating Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, that might turne them away from it, as our Independents goe about to doe. Our own <HI>Cove|nant</HI> al&s;o obligeth the Magi&s;trate to puni&s;h all Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, and the People to a&s;&s;i&s;t him herein: yea, the Independents them&s;elves, in as much as they have entred into the &s;ame <HI>Covenant,</HI> &s;tand equally obliged to re|form Religion, according to their power. Now God hath given them the power to reforme it, in puni&s;hing Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, according to their demerits; which if either We, or They doe not, we are for&s;worne, and God one day will call us to an account.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. IV.</HI> Containing our Adver&s;aries Eva&s;ions.</HEAD>
<P>NOw what &s;ayes <HI>M. S.</HI> to all this, who was &s;o de&s;irous of &s;ome proofes from Scripture?</P>
<P>His fir&s;t An&s;wer is, That <HI>A. S.</HI> bringeth tho&s;e Examples, for want of better Arguments.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. Rep.</HI> 1. And &s;o he jeereth Gods Word. 2. Wherefore are not Argu|ments drawne from Gods Word, good enough in matter of Religion?
<PB N="18" REF="14">3. The&s;e Examples are approved in Scripture, and therefore may very well have the force of a Command.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 2. His &s;econd An&s;wer is, that none of the good Kings of <HI>Iudah</HI> ever offered any violence to the true Prophets of the Lord.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Repl. Neither &s;ay I any &s;uch thing, only I &s;ay they had a Royall, or Politicall Power (which was extrin&s;ecall unto the Church, or of another nature, as your Apologi&s;ts &s;peake) to con&s;erve the true Religion; and in ca&s;e of corruption to reforme it.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his third An&s;wer proves nothing for the per&s;ecuting, annoying, cru&s;hing, di&s;gracing, bani&s;hing, fining the Apologi&s;ts, whom him&s;elfe (more then once, or twice) acknowledgeth for very Pious, Godly, and Learned men.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Neither bring I them to prove any &s;uch thing, I hope they &s;hall prove no fal&s;e Prophets, Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, to be &s;o dealt with. 2. Only I bring the&s;e Pa&s;&s;ages to prove, that the Civill Magi&s;trate may, and is bound in duty to puni&s;h all fal&s;e Prophets, Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, whoever they be. And howbeit they could perchance finde favour enough to e&s;tabli&s;h them&s;elves in one time, by a Princes Authority, yet notwith|&s;tanding all that another, or the very &s;ame Prince upon better information, yea, or a &s;ub&s;equent Parliament may, nay ought to revoke any &s;uch favour &s;o granted them, and to puni&s;h the Sectaries, as tho&s;e good Kings did. Whereas he &s;aith, that I acknowledge the Apologi&s;ts for Pious Per&s;ons; I An&s;wer; Heretofore I judged &s;o of them, by a judgement of Charity, which beleeveth all things; but I would pray him, and them both, under pretext of &s;uch a charitable Iudgement of mine, not to be too licentious in broaching, or pub|li&s;hing of erronious Opinions, lea&s;t they make me to write &s;ome Booke of Retractations, which he, and they will certainly force me to doe, if they con|tinue: Neither &s;hall I be a&s;hamed if they deceive me, but I hope better things of them: And God forbid that they &s;hould goe on upon his violent cour&s;e, rather to &s;ufferdeath, then to change: God change his heart, and I hope in his Mercy he &s;hall doe it.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 4. He &s;aith: Neither did any of tho&s;e Kings ever compell any man to the Iewi&s;h Religion, nor yet to profe&s;&s;e the Iewi&s;h Religion again&s;t their judgements.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> They could not compell their heart or will, but at lea&s;twi&s;e they hindred them from the Externall Acts of idolatry, and other Religions, &s;o far forth as death could hinder them, as appeared from all tho&s;e Texts. They could al&s;o compell their externall actions, read the members of their body to give no offence unto the Church of God; If they could not cut off an ill will, yet could they cut away an ill tongue.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 5. <HI>An&s;wereth.</HI> It was permitted to Per&s;ons of other Nations to live among&s;t them without being Circumci&s;ed, yea or without &s;marting for want.</P>
<PB N="19" REF="14">
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But he bringeth no Text of Scripture to prove, that when the <HI>Iewes</HI> were a free people, and had good Rulers, they then permitted any &s;uch un|circumci&s;ed men to live among&s;t them. 2. Neither doth this any thing again&s;t my Argument, which only proveth a Politicall Power in the Civill Magi&s;trate, who is Extrin&s;ecall to the Church, whereby he might puni&s;h Idolaters, fal&s;e Prophets, and Prie&s;ts, for their Idolatries, fal&s;e Doctrine, and Wor&s;hip. 3. If he did it not, he &s;inned again&s;t the Covenant. 4. However &s;uch might live among&s;t them for &s;ome time uncircumci&s;ed; yet could they not be Inhabi|tants, or true Denizens without Circumci&s;ion. 5. Much le&s;&s;e was the Religi|on of uncircumci&s;ed Per&s;ons tolerated among&s;t them in the times of good Judges, or Kings, as appearech by all tho&s;e Texts. 6. But lea&s;t of all had they power to write Bookes again&s;t their Religion, as the Independents doe here in face of the Parliament, and the A&s;&s;embly again&s;t ours. 7. Yea they could not &s;o much as take a &s;tranger to their Wife, as we read, <HI>Ezra</HI> chap. 9. and 10. and in the Covenant, <HI>Neh.</HI> 10. ver. 30. and 13.23, 24, 25. where it is &s;aid, that <HI>Nehemiah</HI> &s;mote them for &s;uch Marriages, and pluckt off their haire, v. 27, 28. And <HI>Ezra,</HI> chap. 10. made them to put away their &s;trange Wives, and &s;uch as were borne of them. Wherefore then may not the Chri&s;tian Ma|gi&s;trate doe as much?</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 6. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Nor doe we ever read that ever they attempted any thing again&s;t any Sectaries, or Schi&s;maticks (as <HI>A. S.</HI> would call them) which yet abounded in great variety, and numbers among&s;t them, as Scribes, or Pha|ri&s;ees, or Herodians, or Per&s;ons of any other Sect in the Profe&s;&s;ion of the Iewi&s;h Religion, that lived peaceably in their State. Idolatry and Idolaters were, as it &s;eemes, the adequate Object of their coercive power in matters of Religion.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Repl. But we read, that they attempted &s;omething again&s;t fal&s;e Pro|phets, if death be any attempt again&s;t them, as all the Texts, cited by me, &s;hew evidently. 2. I deny your Con&s;equence; we read it not, <HI>Ergo</HI> it was not, for we cannot argue <HI>&agrave; te&s;timonio negativ&egrave;,</HI> yea, not of Scripture, unle&s;&s;e it be in things nece&s;&s;ary to &s;alvation, &s;uch as are not Hi&s;tories of particular facts. 3. The cau&s;e wherefore we read it not is, becau&s;e under good Iudges or Kings, they were never tolerated: ill Kings would not puni&s;h them; but their examples are not to be drawne in Con&s;equence. 4. As for the Scribes, Pha|ri&s;ees, and Herodians, no wonder, if they were not puni&s;hed. 1. For the&s;e Sects begun very late, not long before the comming of Chri&s;t, when the Re|ligion was mightily corrupted, which Chri&s;t came to reforme. 2. Becau&s;e the <HI>Iewes</HI> were not then a free people, neither had they the Civill Power ab|&s;olutely in their owne hands. 3. They had no good Rulers. 4. No more were the <HI>Sadduces</HI> puni&s;hed, who denyed Gods Providence, the Re&s;urrection of the Body, the Immortality of the Soule, and all &s;pirituall natures, as &s;ome te&s;tifie of them; and yet they were more puni&s;hed by Gods Law, then Ido|laters,
<PB N="20" REF="15">&s;ince their errour was greater; &s;o &s;hould the <HI>Herodians</HI> have been pu|ni&s;hed, &s;ince they tooke <HI>Herod</HI> to be the Me&s;&s;ias, and that he &s;hould come a|gaine after that he had been &s;trucken by the Angell; and yet they were not puni&s;hed. 5. The Idolaters were to be puni&s;hed, and yet they lived in pro|fe&s;&s;ion of the Iewi&s;h Religion, for they apo&s;tatized not. It is fal&s;e, that the Idolatry was the adequate Object of their coercive power, for they al&s;o were puni&s;hed, who married &s;trange Women, &amp;c. It is al&s;o a mi&s;take in him, to think, Scribe was the name of a Sect, it is not the name of a Sect, but of an Office, or Profe&s;&s;ion; for one man may be a Scribe, and a Phari&s;ee; a Scribe by his Office, and a Phari&s;ee by his Sect; as you may &s;ee, <HI>Mat.</HI> 22.35. <HI>Then one of them,</HI> viz. of the Phari&s;ees, <HI>which was a Lawyer, asked him a que&s;tion:</HI> A <HI>Lavvyer, i. e.</HI> a Scribe as <HI>Mark</HI> interprets it, chap. 12.28. And <HI>one of the Scribes,</HI> whom <HI>Matthew</HI> calleth <HI>one of the Phari&s;ees.</HI> 2. <HI>E&s;dras</HI> al&s;o was a Scribe, and no Phari&s;ee. 3. It is commonly thought by Divines, that there was three &s;orts of Scribes, Some about the King, which they prove from 2 <HI>Sam.</HI> 8.17. <HI>Sariah was the Scribe,</HI> and 20.25. <HI>Sheva vvas Scribe,</HI> &s;ee 2 <HI>Kings</HI> 12.10. and 22.3. Others were Publick Notaries, as were <HI>the Kenites, that came of</HI> Hemath, <HI>the father of the Hou&s;e of</HI> Rechab, 1 <HI>Chronicles,</HI> 2.25. who had no Heritage with the re&s;t of the Tribes, &s;ee <HI>Ier.</HI> 32.11. where yee &s;ee an Evi|dence drawn up by &s;uch a Notary, and what was the cu&s;tome in drawing up of &s;uch Evidences. Others were as it were Doctors, or Profe&s;&s;ors of the Law, who&s;e charge was to write the Law, and to expound it in the Temple, and in the Synagogues, wherefore they were called <GAP DESC="foreign"> Lawyers, <HI>Matth.</HI> 7.29. and 17.10. and 23.13. <HI>Mar.</HI> 12.28. <HI>Luk.</HI> 7.30. and 11.46. and wi&s;e men, <HI>Ier.</HI> 8.8. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.19. None of them all were accounted for Sectaries.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 7. An&s;w. P. 51. Sect. 21. Nor did they, nor were they to inflict any outward puni&s;hment upon every <HI>kind</HI> of <HI>Idolater,</HI> though of the Iewi&s;h both Nation and Religion; as fir&s;t, not upon <HI>covetous</HI> Per&s;ons, who yet are a kind of <HI>Idolaters:</HI> Nor &s;econdly, upon tho&s;e, who yet wor&s;hipped the true God of I&s;rael, though with &s;ome violation of the &s;econd Commandement, as when they &s;acrificed upon the High Places, &amp;c. But 1. Vpon &s;uch only, who apo&s;ta|tized from the God of I&s;rael; and yet 2. Not upon &s;uch &s;imply, as &s;uch, but as attempting to draw away others of the People unto the &s;ame Idolatries with them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. It is an untruth, that they puni&s;hed not, or at lea&s;t were not bound to puni&s;h all Idolatry, properly &s;o called, &s;ince we have produced you for|mall examples, and Covenants to the contrary; as <HI>Exod.</HI> 32.27. <HI>Deut.</HI> 22.11.2. Neither were they Apo&s;tates, that pleaded for <HI>Baal,</HI> and yet a &s;entence of death was given again&s;t them conditionally, <HI>Iudg.</HI> 6.31, or they of whom it is &s;poken. 1 <HI>Kings</HI> 15.12. 2 <HI>Chro.</HI> 14.4, 5.3. Neither could the &s;mall ones in the 15. chap. ver. 13. yet be Apo&s;tates, or entice others to Idolatry: and yet in ca&s;e of Idolatry, or of not &s;eeking the Lord, they were to dye. 4. Nor
<PB N="21" REF="15">read we, that <HI>Maachah</HI> the Kings Mother, who was puni&s;hed, was an Apo&s;tate. 5. Or tho&s;e that are mentioned in <HI>E&s;dras,</HI> and <HI>Nehemiah.</HI> 6. Yea when the Kings, or people fell away to Idolatry, we never finde that they apo&s;tatized, for then they &s;hould have been no more Gods people. 7. Only they joyned I|dolatry with the &s;ervice of the true God; yea our Divines in di&s;puting again&s;t Papi&s;ts, maintaine the Papi&s;ts are Idolaters, for the adoration of Statues and Images; and that the people of the <HI>Iewes</HI> were not &s;o mad, as to have ima|gined their Statues or Images to be true Gods: only they adored God in Ima|ges and Statues, and the act of their Adoration <HI>terminative</HI> was related to God, and not to the Image, as that of the Papi&s;ts. And as for your in&s;tance of <HI>Covetous</HI> Per&s;ons; it is ridiculous, for <HI>covetou&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> is not properly Idolatry, &s;uch as the Scripture &s;peaketh of in the Texts, which I produce; or &s;uch as is comprehended in the &s;econd Commandement, and is again&s;t God; but improperly, &s;ince it is not formally a breach of the Fir&s;t, but of the Second Table. 2. Not formally and immediatly a &s;inne again&s;t God, but again&s;t our Neighbour. Nor is the &s;acrificing upon the High Places formally, and e&s;&s;enti|ally Idolatry. 1. For Idolatry is a &s;inne again&s;t the &s;econd Commandement, which is <HI>Iuris naturalis &amp; perpetui,</HI> but to &s;acrifice upon High Places is not formally and e&s;&s;entially again&s;t any Commandement, that is <HI>Juris naturalis &amp; perpetui.</HI> 2. But only again&s;t a Po&s;itive, and temporall commandement of not &s;acrificing in the high places; after that the Temple was built, whereunto God tyed the Religious act of &s;acrifice. 3. Becau&s;e the Prohibitive Comman|dement about &s;acrificing upon High Places came long after the Second Com|mandement about Idolatry, viz. after that the Temple was built. Neither can <HI>M. S.</HI> bring any Text of Scripture for what he &s;aith, viz. that only Apo&s;tates, or Idolaters, who enticed others to Idolatry, were to be puni&s;hed. 2. Howbeit they be to be puni&s;hed, yet others are not to be excluded from puni&s;hment. I pray the Reader to con&s;ider, how tender-hearted this man is towards Ido|laters and fal&s;e Prophets; he pleadeth for them, as if he had a will to be one of them him&s;elfe: Neither in our Religion u&s;e we the rigour of this Law, a|gain&s;t &s;uch as are not pertinacious, or who will repent of their &s;inne: Our Churches de&s;ire not the death of a &s;inner, but of the &s;inne; not of the Here|ticke or Schi&s;matick, but of the Schi&s;me and Here&s;ie. We di&s;tingui&s;h betwixt Here&s;ie, and Here&s;ie; Schi&s;me, and Schi&s;me; for &s;ome are of more, &s;ome of le&s;&s;e dangerous con&s;equence: Item betwixt Hereticks, and Hereticks; Schi&s;|maticks, and Schi&s;maticks; for &s;ome are Ring-leaders, &s;ome mi&s;led: &s;ome more, &s;ome le&s;&s;e pertinacious and malicious, &amp;c. and every one of them are to be puni&s;h't according to the quality of the Here&s;ie and Heretick, of the Schi&s;me and Schi&s;matick. Sometimes al&s;o the Circum&s;tances of Times, Places, and Per&s;ons are to be con&s;idered. And we are to doe what we may, and not what we may not:</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> His eighth An&s;wer (as if what he had &s;aid were only to exerci&s;e
<PB N="22" REF="16">his quick &s;pirit, and to &s;hew how cunningly he can elude &s;trong Arguments) is, That there are two rea&s;ons why the Kings of <HI>Judah</HI> might be inve&s;ted by God with a larger power in matters of Religion, then Kings and Magi&s;trates under the Go&s;pel: 1. Becau&s;e their Kings were types of Chri&s;t, which ours are not: 2. And their People of the &s;pirituall Church of Chri&s;t, and their Land of the Heavenly inheritance of that Church, which wee cannot claime.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. To be a type of Chri&s;t, is not a &s;ufficient ground of a Po|liticall power over the Church, or about the Church: For 1. then the Prie&s;ts, and &s;ome Prophets, as <HI>Jonas,</HI> &s;hould have had it: Yea, <HI>Adam, I&s;aac,</HI> yea &s;ome other thing, as the Tree of Life, the fir&s;t born of the Flock offered in Sacri|fice by <HI>Abel,</HI> the Pa&s;chall Lambe, the brazen Serpent, all the Victimes of the Old Te&s;tament, the Ark and the Propitiatory: for they were all types of Chri&s;t.</P>
<P N="2">2. Becau&s;e it hath no influence upon Civill Authority.</P>
<P N="3">3. Becau&s;e it could not repre&s;ent any Civill authority in Chri&s;t, &s;ince his Kingdome was not of this World.</P>
<P N="4">4. It may be doubted how they were types of Chri&s;t, whether in re&s;pect of their Civill authority over the Church, or over the State, or otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P N="5">5. It may be doubted if they were all types of Chri&s;t; as <HI>Athalia, Ma|na&s;&s;eh, Ammon,</HI> who de&s;troyed Gods &s;ervice, and the order of the Church; <HI>item, Herod,</HI> who per&s;ecuted Chri&s;t, was &s;ure no type of Chri&s;t, and yet was King.</P>
<P N="6">6. If &s;o, then the King of <HI>Egypt,</HI> of <HI>Syria,</HI> of the <HI>Phili&s;tims,</HI> yea the <HI>Ro|mans,</HI> who domineered over them, were types of Chri&s;t. At lea&s;t, the Kings of <HI>I&s;rael</HI> were not types of Chri&s;t, &s;ince they were all apo&s;tatized from the Cere|moniall Law that ordained all the types: for a type, whether it be a thing, a per&s;on, per&s;ons, action, effect, or event, it mu&s;t &s;ignifie &s;omething to come. 2. It mu&s;t &s;ignifie, by Gods in&s;titution or ordinance; and therefore neither was the Nazareate, or all the Nazarites types of Chri&s;t, as &s;ome Divines hold: 1. Becau&s;e the Nazareate was not a ceremony ordained by God, but volunta|rily vowed. 2. Becau&s;e it prefigurated not Chri&s;t to come, or his benefits: and therefore, &s;ay they, Chri&s;t drank wine, and touched the dead: only they vowed it to bring under their fle&s;h, and for a pious exerci&s;e.</P>
<P N="7">7. Howbeit they had been types of Chri&s;t in regard of their authority a|bout the Church, yet will it not follow, that Chri&s;tian Princes cannot have it: for that which was typicall might be taken away, and that which was politi|call may remaine.</P>
<P N="8">8. And I put the ca&s;e, that the Iewes had received Chri&s;t, as ab&s;olutely they might have done, who can doubt but their Politicall Government might have continued, and their Kings ruled as well the Church externally, as they did before his comming, &s;ince Chri&s;ts Kingdome was not of this World, and
<PB N="23" REF="16">that he came not to aboli&s;h or to dimini&s;h the power of Kings, but to &s;ave their &s;oules: they were no wayes lo&s;ers by Chri&s;ts comming, but rather gai|ners. He might as well have &s;aid, they had a Civill power about the Church, becau&s;e they had their no&s;es betwixt their eyes. Many were types of Chri&s;t, that had not this authority about the Church; and many had this authority about the Church, who were not types of Chri&s;t: <HI>Ergo,</HI> this rea&s;on of his is fal&s;e, and ridiculous.</P>
<P>No more were the people of the Iewes types of the Chri&s;tian Church, in re&s;pect of the Civill, but of the Spirituall and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government by Church-officers, and the People &s;ubject thereunto. So al&s;o was their Land a type of the Cele&s;tiall Hieru&s;alem, not as it conteined the State, but the Church; otherwi&s;e it &s;hould have been a type of Heaven, before that the people of God had any right to it. And finally, types are not ordained by the Politicall or Morall Law, as Magi&s;trates, and their Authority, (at lea&s;t, <HI>qua tales</HI>) but only by the Ceremoniall Law. True it is, that God may &s;erve him&s;elfe of a thing in&s;tituted by the Morall Law to be a type, but he mu&s;t make it a type by &s;ome &s;ub&s;equent Ceremoniall Law.</P>
<P>What he &s;aith again&s;t all this, <HI>p.</HI> 52. &sect;.23. that good Kings never oppre&s;&s;ed godly per&s;ons, when they were for a while tender in con&s;cience, it is not to the purpo&s;e. We only &s;ay here, that they may puni&s;h Idolaters, Seducers, Hereticks, and Sectaries; who are never &s;uch, till they be &s;ufficiently convicted, and after that remain pertinacious: But no wayes good people, under the notion of good people, but &s;o far forth as they doe ami&s;&s;e: And what rea|&s;on, if he who heretofore by the judgement of Charity was thought a good man, if he become an Heretick, or a Murtherer, &s;hould not be puni&s;hed accor|ding to Law, &s;ince the Magi&s;trate puni&s;heth him not for his good, but for his ill?</P>
<P>&sect;. 24. He &s;aith, that I mu&s;t prove that the Kings of Iudah had &s;uch a power by a Morall law, which is of a perpetuall obligation and engagement upon o|ther Nations.</P>
<P>A.S. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> It &s;uffices, that I have proved it by a Politicall Law; and that the &s;ame rea&s;on obliges Chri&s;tian Princes, v<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">z. <HI>B. cau&s;e they will turne thee from the Lord thy God,</HI> Deut. 13.5.10. <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters"> Thus Politicall law is grounded upon the fifth Commandement, which is <HI>Iuris naturalis.</HI> It mu&s;t be &s;o, &s;ince it is grounded in naturall rea&s;on. 4. And our Rea&s;ons (God willing) hereafter &s;hall make it appeare. 5. In the mean time, take for an example <HI>Nebuchad|nezzar,</HI> who, &s;ince he was no le<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters">, could not doe it in vertue of any Politicall law of the Iewes, for he was no Subject of the Kingdome of Iuda: only he could doe it in vertue of the Morall, or &s;ome Politicall law grounded on the Morall, or the law of Nature.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> It was no more Morall, then that of the <HI>&s;taying of the inhabitants of the</HI> idolatrous <HI>City, and the cattell thereof, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB N="24" REF="17">
<P><HI>A.</HI> S. I deny it, for the one is grounded upon Naturall and Divine rea&s;on, as we have &s;eene, and (God willing) &s;hall &s;ee more fully by our following rea&s;ons: but &s;o is not the other.</P>
<P>P. 52, 53. &sect;. 25. An&s;w. 8. <HI>M.</HI> S. An&s;wers 1. That the Kings of <HI>Iuda</HI> only exerci&s;ed their power about Idolatry, and Idolaters.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I deny it: 1. For they exerci&s;ed it al&s;o in beating downe of the High Places, wherein there was not Idolatry, as having been permitted before the building of the Temple. 2. Becau&s;e there is the &s;ame rea&s;on binding them, to exerci&s;e it again&s;t the tran&s;gre&s;&s;ions of the fir&s;t Commandement, the violation whereof is more directly again&s;t Gods Honour; for &s;acrificing in High Places is but a circum&s;tance of the &s;econd Commandement violated, but Here&s;ie and Schi&s;me are formall breaches of the fir&s;t Commandement; the one of faith, the other of charity therein commanded, and the fal&s;e Prophet was to be put to death. 2. In the &s;ame Section he &s;aith, that it was the generality of the Church, or Nation of the <HI>Jewes,</HI> and not their Kings that was inve&s;ted with it by God, <HI>Deut.</HI> 13. and 7.5. and 12.2, 3.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Here is Anabapti&s;me in deve&s;ting the Magi&s;trate of his Power, and ve&s;ting the people with it. What? had every one the power of the Sword a|mong&s;t the people of the <HI>Iewes?</HI> 2. Was their Government Democraticall? or rather Anarchicall? Had women, children, and &s;ervants this Power? I grant you that in vertue of the Law, and their Covenant, they had all an hand in in the matter; but not ab&s;olutely, but every man according to his Vocation: the King and Magi&s;trate, as Judges, but the people only to execute accor|ding to their Commands. Neither is it credible, that when a fal&s;e Prophet, or an Idolater was to be puni&s;hed, every one of the people was to judge him at his plea&s;ure, or to &s;tone him to death. Neither containe the&s;e Pa&s;&s;ages, that you cite any &s;uch thing, and therefore you did very cunningly not to quote the words them&s;elves, whereupon you ground this conclu&s;ion. And is this all the power and re&s;pect you give to the Parliament, and Civill Magi&s;trate in Eccle&s;i|a&s;ticall matters, even no more then to the meane&s;t of the people? Truely they are much beholden to you for your great liberality: And if &s;o, ride on in de|&s;pite of King and Parliament to your beloved Conventicles. Neither can I finde in the&s;e pa&s;&s;ages, <HI>Deut.</HI> 7.5. and 12.2, 3. or <HI>Deut.</HI> 13. any &s;uch thing, viz. that it was the generality of the Church, or Nation of the <HI>Iewes,</HI> that were inve&s;ted with it; for God never inve&s;ted the confu&s;ed multitude in any judici|all, or authoritative power.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. V.</HI> Wherein the &s;ame Conclu&s;ion is further proved by Rea&s;ons.</HEAD>
<P>NOw after the&s;e Te&s;timonies out of Holy Writ, I bring the&s;e Rea&s;ons fol|lowing, grounded upon it: and 1. That power which the Civill Magi|trate had in the old Te&s;tament, and is not abrogated in the New may yet con|tinue
<PB N="25" REF="17">in the <HI>New,</HI> or the Civill Magi&s;trate may have it in the <HI>New.</HI></P>
<P>But the power to puni&s;h Hereticks, and Schi&s;maticks is a Power, which the Civill Magi&s;trate had in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament</HI> and is not abrogated in the <HI>New Te&s;tament. Ergo</HI> the power to puni&s;h Hereticks, and Schi&s;maticks, is a &s;uch a Power he may Civill Magi&s;trate may have in the <HI>New,</HI> and &s;o in vertue of Power, which the puni&s;h them.</P>
<P>The Major is certaine, for there is no other true way to make it not to continue, but only the abrogation: As for the Minor, the fir&s;t part of it is certaine, as appeareth by the Texts of Scripture already alleadged. The &s;e|cond Part may ea&s;ily be proved, becau&s;e only the Ceremoniall Law, which contained the &s;hadow of things to come, was abrogated in the New Te&s;ta|ment. The Morall Law was not abrogated &s;o farre forth as it is a Rule of obedience, nor as it bindes us thereunto: No more is the Politicall Law in quality of Politicall; for by the &s;ame rea&s;on Chri&s;t &s;hould have over-thrown and abrogated all the Politicall Lawes, and policies of the world. But that is fal&s;e, for Chri&s;ts Kingdome was not of this world; and he &s;ubmitteth him|&s;elfe unto the Politicall Law of the <HI>Jewes,</HI> yea unto that of the <HI>Romans</HI> al&s;o, e&s;tabli&s;hed among&s;t the <HI>Jewes:</HI> So did <HI>Paul</HI> and the Apo&s;tles, who pleaded their cau&s;es before Heathen Magi&s;trates; I appeale unto <HI>Cae&s;ar,</HI> &s;aith <HI>Paul, Non auferet mortalia, qui regna dat Coele&s;tia.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. Yea, if the <HI>Jewes</HI> had received Chri&s;t for their Me&s;&s;ias, I doubt not but the Politicall Law of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> in quality of Politicall, &s;hould have continued a|mong&s;t them, and the Civill Magi&s;trate among&s;t them &s;hould have puni&s;hed Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, Idolaters, &amp;c. in the New Te&s;tament, as they did in the Old. Neither is there any rea&s;on, wherefore Chri&s;t, or his Apo&s;tles &s;hould have hindred him by his Politicall power to maintaine the Chri&s;tian Religion in the New Te&s;tament, as before he did in the Old.</P>
<P N="3">3. And it may be further confirmed, becau&s;e the greater the favours be, that the Civill Magi&s;trate hath received of God in the New Te&s;tament then in the Old; &s;o much the greater obligation is laid upon him by his Power, to maintaine Gods Cau&s;e, and Religion.</P>
<P N="4">4. And the holier our Covenant is, and the further it &s;urpa&s;&s;es the Old, &s;o much the greater &s;hould the Civill Magi&s;trates care be, to maintaine it by his Civill Power.</P>
<P N="5">5. If it were not &s;o, the State of the Church in regard of the Civill Magi|&s;trate &s;hould be wor&s;e in the New, then in the Old Te&s;tament; for then he maintained it by his Civill Power, and by the &s;word; and now he doth it not, nor yet hath the power to doe it.</P>
<P N="6">6. Is not this plaine Anabapti&s;me, to approve the authority of the Civill Magi&s;trate in the Old Te&s;tament, and to reject it in the New; for as the Ana|bapti&s;ts reject it wholly in the New Te&s;tament, &s;o doe the Independents in part, yea in a great part, viz. in that, which concerneth the defence of the
<PB N="26" REF="18">Church in puni&s;hing Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, Idolaters, &amp;c.</P>
<P N="7">7. He who &s;hould be a Nur&s;e, and a Tutor of the Church in the New Te&s;tament, &s;hould defend her by all his power: But Kings and Princes, and good Magi&s;trates &s;hould be &s;uch, as we may &s;ee in all the Examples heretofore alleadged, and in <HI>Pharaoh,</HI> and <HI>E&s;ay</HI> 1.49.22. where it is promi&s;ed that Kings &s;hall be Nur&s;es of the Church.</P>
<P N="8">8. What if forraigne Princes would invade the Church of God? may not godly Princes in &s;uch a ca&s;e ju&s;tly defend it, and repre&s;&s;e them by the &s;word? wherefore then may they not doe the like to their owne Subjects, who will trouble her peace, and by &s;o doing compell them to their duty?</P>
<P N="9">9. Doth not the Civill Magi&s;trate this in <HI>New England?</HI> wherefore then may he not doe it in Old <HI>England,</HI> unle&s;&s;e for&s;ooth the Maje&s;taticall pre&s;ence of five or &s;ix Independent Mini&s;ters here be capable to dazle, and di&s;counte|nance him here, whereas they receive all their lu&s;tre and influence from him there, or that as Monkes and Friers yee plead <HI>pro immunitate Clericorum,</HI> or that the ridiculous thunder-bolts of Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwins</HI> pretended Judgements of God, be capeable to da&s;h it all in pieces here?</P>
<P N="10">10. If the Civill Magi&s;trate have not a &s;ufficient Power to puni&s;h Idola|ters, Hereticks, and Schi&s;maticks for Religion, then all the Roman Lawes in the <HI>Code</HI> made again&s;t Hereticks, and tho&s;e of this Kingdome made a|gain&s;t Ie&s;uites, Monkes, and Prie&s;ts, mu&s;t be unju&s;t; yea the Iudgements gi|ven out again&s;t them &s;ince this Parliament begun are unju&s;t; and if &s;o, you would doe well to tell them of it: If we beleeve the&s;e <HI>American</HI> Chri&s;tians, the Parliaments Lawes are little le&s;&s;e then tyrannicall.</P>
<P N="11">11. That for which all Princes are commended in Scripture, that all good Princes &s;hould doe; and for which they are di&s;commended, that &s;hould they not doe. But for puni&s;hing of Idolaters, Schi&s;maticks, Hereticks, &amp;c. all Princes that did &s;o in Scripture are commended, and for &s;paring of them are di&s;commended. <HI>Ergo</HI> all good Princes &s;hould puni&s;h Hereticks, &amp;c. and not &s;pare them. The Major is certaine, the Minor is &s;ufficiently proved by the Examples of all the good Kings of <HI>Juda,</HI> and of <HI>Iehu.</HI></P>
<P N="12">12. They are bound to puni&s;h all &s;uch, as trouble the peace of the State, <HI>Ergo</HI> they are likewi&s;e bound to puni&s;h &s;uch as trouble the peace of the Church, for who ever troubleth the peace of the Chri&s;tian Church, troubleth al&s;o the peace of the State, when the State is Chri&s;tian.</P>
<P N="13">13. If the Civill Magi&s;trate be not bound by his Office to puni&s;h Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, &amp;c. he is bound to tolerate them all; and &s;o to tolerate all Independents, all Browni&s;ts, Anabapti&s;ts, Famili&s;ts, Socinians, &amp;c. yea &s;ome, who deny the Immortality of the Soule, that hold a generall Re&s;ur|rection of all Bea&s;ts, as well as of men; yea of all, that ever have been &s;ince the Creation of the world, or &s;hall be to the day of Iudgement: peradventure of Lice, Flyes, VVormes, &amp;c. and &s;o he &s;hall doe well to Licence the
<PB N="27" REF="18">Bookes of &s;uch &s;ubjects, till Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwin, alias M. S.</HI> re&s;ute them; for he findes no other remedy in Gods Word, but to refute &s;uch Bookes. If we be|leeve this new Go&s;peller, yee &s;hall have in a &s;hort time as many Religions as dayes, yea as houres in a yeare: yea without all doubt, I tremble to &s;ay it, (the Lord pre&s;erve us from it) as many Gods as ever the <HI>Greakes,</HI> and <HI>Re|mans</HI> had. Wherefore in the name of God take heed, yee all mo&s;t Honoura|ble Worthies of the two Hou&s;es of Parliament, to this mo&s;t damnable Tenet.</P>
<P N="14">14. Princes, Kings, and Iudges in Scripture are called Deliverers, or Sa|viours of the people, becau&s;e they defend the Church from her Oppre&s;&s;ors, <HI>Iudg.</HI> 2.16. &s;uch as be Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, &amp;c. If therefore yee be our Iudges, mo&s;t Honourable, and worthy Senators, it is your part to defend Gods people, the Religion, which he hath e&s;tabli&s;hed in his Word, and to de&s;troy Oppre&s;&s;ors, and the Enemies thereof; I meane not their Bodies, but their Oppre&s;&s;ions, their Here&s;ies and Schi&s;mes.</P>
<P N="15">15. Ma&s;ters have power to put Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks out of their hou&s;es, in ca&s;e they be pertinacious; <HI>Ergo</HI> Princes and Magi&s;trates have the &s;ame power in the State, for there is the &s;ame rea&s;on for both, viz. not to &s;uf|fer God to be offended &s;o far forth as in us lyeth.</P>
<P N="16">16. What power is <HI>juris naturalis,</HI> is to be exerci&s;ed in all times and places according to our power: But the power to puni&s;h Hereticks, &amp;c. is <HI>Iuris naturalis, Erge</HI> it is to be exerci&s;ed in all times, and places. The fir&s;t Propo&s;i|tion is certaine; for that which is <HI>juris naturalis</HI> changeth not, but is the &s;ame in all times and places, becau&s;e it is not grounded in any incon&s;tant or voluntary in&s;titution of our will, but in the immutable ordinance of Nature, which dictates the &s;ame thing to all Per&s;ons, in all times, and in all places. The &s;econd I prove, becau&s;e it is a Dictate of the Law of Nature, that &s;uch, as trouble the true Religion, are to be puni&s;hed; and <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> gives you a naturall rea&s;on of it, viz. <HI>for they will turne thy heart away from the Lord thy God, Deut.</HI> 7.4. and 13.5. the rea&s;on will be thus: who ever in all Morall proba|bility will turne the peoples heart away from God, it is the Civill Magi&s;trates duty to puni&s;h him. But Hereticks, &amp;c. are &s;uch, <HI>Ergo</HI> it is the Civill Magi|&s;trates duty to puni&s;h them; it is <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> argument.</P>
<P N="17">17. If the Civill Magi&s;trate puni&s;h not Hereticks, he &s;hould become a partaker of other mens &s;ins, becau&s;e he hindereth them not, &s;o farre forth as in him lyeth by his Civill Power, viz. in puni&s;hing them: neither carrieth he the &s;word in vaine; neither can it be better employed then in puni&s;hing pertinacious &s;inners, &s;uch as are Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks: But he &s;hould not become a partaker of other mens &s;ins, as the light of Nature, and Scrip|ture teacheth us, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5.22.</P>
<P N="18">18. If he puni&s;h not Hereticks, then every man in the Kingdome &s;hall have power to mould him&s;elfe a new Religion, according to his owne heart, as the
<PB N="28" REF="19">I&s;raelites did their golden Calfe, and doe what &s;hould &s;eeme right in his owne eyes. But the Con&s;equent is ab&s;urd, <HI>Deut.</HI> 13.8. Neither was it per|mitted among&s;t the Heathens them&s;elves, that any man &s;hould bring in new Gods, or new Religions, by their owne private authority. We read how the <HI>Athenians</HI> &s;entenced <HI>Diagoras, Anaxagoras,</HI> and <HI>Socrates</HI> for their new Opinions in matter of Religion; and <HI>Phila&s;trius</HI> telleth us, how the <HI>Audiani</HI> were condemned for Hereticks, becau&s;e that they commended all Sects and Here&s;ies; why not al&s;o the Independents, for commending and defending the toleration of them all?</P>
<P N="19">19. Becau&s;e <HI>we pray to God for Kings, and for all that be in Authority; that we may lead a quiet and a peaceable life in all Godline&s;&s;e and hone&s;ty,</HI> 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.2. By their conver&s;ion to Chri&s;t, v. 3, 4, 5. to the end, that being converted, they may defend Religion, in puni&s;hing Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, and &s;o in re|pre&s;&s;ing of Schi&s;me and Here&s;ie.</P>
<P N="20">20. Becau&s;e in a State wherein all men profe&s;&s;e the truth, the peace of the State cannot be otherwayes pre&s;erved; nor the &s;afety of the Kingdome, which is the ultimate end of the Civill Magi&s;trate, <HI>qua talis,</HI> and the &s;upreme Law of the Republike be obtained: for how &s;hall peace, &s;afety, and unity be procured among&s;t Orthodox Subjects, but by unity in Truth? and how can the bond of unity be any wayes &s;o &s;oon, and &s;o ea&s;ily broken, as by diver&s;ity of Religi|ons? And this the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Hi&s;tory fully &s;heweth us: for what mi&s;eries cannot the&s;e Schi&s;mes breed; when the Husband is of one Religion, and the wife of another; the Father of one, and the Sonne of another; Brethren and Si&s;ters of divers Religions; the King of one, and the Subjects of another? How many Families hath it di&s;&s;olved? how many Cities hath it de&s;troyed? Have we not Examples fre&s;h and bleeding before us in <HI>Ireland,</HI> &amp;c? It hath co&s;t &s;ome Kings their Crowns, &s;ome their lives, and endangered others of their life and Kingdome both. Yea, what is one of the principall cau&s;es of our pre&s;ent divi&s;ions betwixt <HI>the King and the Subjects?</HI> Is not Arminiani&s;me, Sociniani&s;me, the Archiepi&s;copall (I know not what) Religion? Some call it Popery, &s;ome Sociniani&s;me, others Arminiani&s;me, others Lutherani&s;me, o|thers &s;ome mixture of Religion, not much unlike to Samaritani&s;me. But be it what it will; diver&s;ity of Religion, and not puni&s;hing of Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, is the principall cau&s;e of all the&s;e our mi&s;eries and con|fu&s;ions.</P>
<P N="21">21. The Civill Magi&s;trate is to puni&s;h &s;uch as marry with tho&s;e of a con|trary Religion, and that becau&s;e they are of contrary Religions, as appea|reth by the texts of Scripture already alleadged, [<HI>Deut.</HI> 7.2.3.] How much more tho&s;e, who <HI>are</HI> of contrary Religions? <HI>nam propter quod unumquodque tale, id magis tale:</HI> for it is a greater &s;in to be an Idolater, or an Heretick, then to be married to them.</P>
<P N="22">22. Tho&s;e, with whom we cannot enter into Covenant, cannot be tole|rated
<PB N="29" REF="19">among us, but mu&s;t be at lea&s;t exiled by the Civill Magi&s;trate: for, to live among&s;t us, they mu&s;t, at lea&s;t, enter into Covenant with us for an offen|&s;ive and defen&s;ive warre again&s;t forraigne Enemies:</P>
<P>But with Idolaters, Hereticks, &amp;c. we cannot enter into Covenant, <HI>Deut.</HI> 7.2. &s;o <HI>E&s;dras</HI> and <HI>Nehemiah</HI> above quoted: <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P N="23">23. Becau&s;e God hath promi&s;ed to de&s;troy our Enemies, if we de&s;troy his: wherefore, rather then God &s;hould not de&s;troy ours, were it not policie to la|bour the de&s;truction of his?</P>
<P N="24">24. The man who will not hearken to the Mini&s;ters of the Church, and the Civill Magi&s;trate, the Civill Magi&s;trate mu&s;t puni&s;h him. But Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks are the men, who will not hearken unto the Mini&s;ters of the Church, and to the Civill Magi&s;trate; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the Civill Magi&s;trate mu&s;t puni&s;h them. The fir&s;t Propo&s;ition is cleere: <HI>The man that will doe pre&s;umptuou&s;ly, and will not hearken unto the Prie&s;t, or unto the Judge, even that man &s;hall dye, Deut.</HI> 12.12. Neither know I what can be an&s;wered, &s;ave only, that that mu&s;t be under&s;tood of the Prie&s;t of the Old Te&s;tament. But there is the &s;ame rea&s;on for the Mini&s;ters of the New Te&s;tament, viz. 1. The taking away of evill, the con&s;ervation of order and unity, and to avoyd Schi&s;me. 2. Neither did Chri&s;t by his death obtaine for us an immunity from all obedience, or an independent licentiou&s;ne&s;&s;e to doe ill. 3. And this is the Holy Gho&s;ts rea&s;on in that &s;ame place: <HI>And thou &s;halt put away the evill from I&s;rael: And all the people &s;hall heare, and feare, and doe no more pre&s;umptuou&s;ly,</HI> ver. 12.13. which obligeth us as well unto obedience under the New Te&s;tament, as tho&s;e of the Old Te&s;tament.</P>
<P N="25">25. So we have an Example of <HI>Corah, Dathan, Abiram,</HI> and <HI>On,</HI> who were <HI>Independents,</HI> and for their <HI>independency,</HI> and not &s;ubjection unto the <HI>authori|tative power</HI> of <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Aaron,</HI> were &s;everely puni&s;hed by <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> and pe|ri&s;hed mi&s;erably.</P>
<P>We might bring many rea&s;ons of the Holy Gho&s;t him&s;elfe, wherefore the Civill Magi&s;trate mu&s;t puni&s;h <HI>Idolaters, fal&s;e Prophets,</HI> or Hereticks, &amp;c.</P>
<P N="26">26. Becau&s;e Gods people <HI>is an holy people to the Lord.</HI></P>
<P N="27">27. Becau&s;e they know that God is <HI>faithfull, and keepeth his Covenant, Deut.</HI> 7. and 13. Neither can any man blame &s;uch Arguments, but tho&s;e who will blame the Holy Gho&s;t his Arguments; for they are not mine, but His.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VI.</HI> Wherein are an&s;wered <HI>M.S.</HI> his Rea&s;ons, that he hath, <HI>Chap. 1.</HI> And fir&s;t the fir&s;t &s;ixe.</HEAD>
<P>NOw I will propound <HI>M.S.</HI> his Objections, whereof many conclude, that this Intrin&s;ecall power not only doth belong to the Civill Magi&s;trate, but al&s;o to all the members of the Church.</P>
<PB N="30" REF="20">
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> then, p. 33. &sect;. 2. argueth, 1. thus: By &s;uch an umpirage and deci&s;ion as this, between the Civill Magi&s;trate, and him&s;elfe, viz. <HI>A.S.</HI> with his fellow Presbyters, hath he not made the one <HI>Judex,</HI> and the other <HI>Carnifex:</HI> the one, i. e. the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> mu&s;t give the &s;entence; the other mu&s;t doe execution.</P>
<P>An&s;w. <HI>A.S.</HI> 1. There is no deci&s;ion at all between the Civill Magi&s;trate, and <HI>A. S.</HI> for <HI>A. S.</HI> is but a private man, neither Magi&s;trate, nor Church-Officer. 2. Neither are the Presbyters his fellow-Presbyters, &s;ince he is no Presbyter: The&s;e then, in the beginning, are manife&s;t untruths. 3. Neither can this deci&s;ion in granting an <HI>Intrin&s;ecall povver,</HI> both <HI>directive</HI> and <HI>execu|tive,</HI> to the <HI>Church;</HI> and an <HI>Extrin&s;ecall</HI> to the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> (viz. which is <HI>extrin&s;ecall</HI> in re&s;pect of <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall povver,</HI> but <HI>intrin&s;ecall</HI> to <HI>Civill povver</HI>) make the <HI>Church</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;embly</HI> a <HI>Judge,</HI> and the <HI>Parlia|ment</HI> or <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> a <HI>Hangman</HI> (to remember his mo&s;t humble re&s;pects unto the King, Parliament, and all the Iudges of this Kingdome) For the Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies (as it is the common opinion of all our Divines) cannot judge of the Civill Magi&s;trate his duty. 2. Neither have they ever been &s;o fooli&s;h, as <HI>M. S.</HI> mo&s;t pa&s;&s;ionately and impudently calumniateth them here, to command him any thing. 3. They acknowledge mo&s;t willingly, that the Church, being materially a part of the State, is &s;ubject to Civill Government. 4. That the Church, which is the Kingdome of Chri&s;t, hath no Civill power, &s;ince it is not of this World, <HI>Joh.</HI> 18.26. 5. That the Civill Magi&s;trate com|manding and compelling &s;uch as be refractory and di&s;obedient to the Church, mu&s;t not &s;ee with the Churches eyes, but with his own Civill or Politicall eyes. 6. And that in &s;o doing he obeyeth not the Church, or any Eccle&s;i|a&s;ticall power, but God, who&s;e power he exerci&s;eth in the State, as the Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies doe exerci&s;e Chri&s;ts power in the Church. 7. Yea more, that &s;ometimes the Civill Magi&s;trate may not puni&s;h tho&s;e who are di&s;obedient to the Church, <HI>viz.</HI> if thereupon may follow the undoing of the State, &amp;c. 8. For the &s;ame rea&s;on, it is mo&s;t untrue, that the one <HI>giveth out the &s;entence, and the other mu&s;t doe execution.</HI> 9. And moreover, becau&s;e they are two &s;everall Iudicatories, they are both independent one upon another, how&s;oever both divers wayes &s;ubject one to another: for the Civill Magi|&s;trate is &s;ubject in a &s;pirituall way to the Church; He mu&s;t learne Gods will by the Mini&s;ters of the Church, who are Gods Amba&s;&s;adours, &s;ent unto him: He mu&s;t be &s;ubject unto Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Cen&s;ures, as we &s;ee by the Examples of the Kings in the Old Te&s;tament, and <HI>Theodo&s;ius</HI> the Emperour in the New. So the Church againe is &s;ubject not in a Spirituall, but in a Civill way, to the Government of the Civill Magi&s;trate, as all Prote&s;tants, and Mini&s;ters them|&s;elves confe&s;&s;e, and plead for it again&s;t the Romane Clergie, in favour of the Civill Magi&s;trate. 10. The Civill Magi&s;trate hath power, not to receive into the State all that which the Church judgeth fitting: He may irre&s;i&s;tably hin|der
<PB N="31" REF="20">it, if he will. 11. If he be <HI>Carnifex,</HI> becau&s;e that he commands it to be put in execution, he &s;hould be <HI>Carnifex,</HI> when ever he &s;hould command his own judgements to be put in execution 12. So &s;hould Independents be <HI>Carnifices,</HI> when either the Civill Magi&s;trate or the Church commands them to doe their duty. 13. The <HI>Carnifex</HI> or Executioner pronounceth not a &s;entence as the Ma|gi&s;trate.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Obj. 2. pag. 33. The Civill Magi&s;trate is much beholding to the Presbyter, for giving him a Con&s;ecrated &s;word to fight the Presbiterian bat|tels; and for per&s;wading of him to pull out his own eyes, upon this pre&s;ump|tion, that he &s;hall &s;ee better with his.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> As able as this man is in jeering, and calumniating, as unable is he in arguing again&s;t this truth, e&s;pecially if he have no better arguments in his Budget by way of Re&s;erve, then what he brings here, all he &s;aith is utterly fal&s;e. 1. The Presbyterians have none but &s;pirituall battels to fight; 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.3, 4. the weapons of their warfare are not carnall. 2. They doe not warre after the fle&s;h; neither wra&s;tle they again&s;t fle&s;h and bloud, but again&s;t the Ru|lers of the darkne&s;&s;e of this world, again&s;t &s;pirituall wickedne&s;&s;e in High Places; their &s;word is the &s;word of the &s;pirit, <HI>Eph.</HI> 6.12. And therefore they cannot, nor pretend they to give him this &s;pirituall &s;word; they cannot quit it: much le&s;&s;e can they give him the materiall &s;word which is none of theirs to give, <HI>for he hath it of God; he is the Mini&s;ter of God,</HI> Rom. 13.4. <HI>avenger,</HI> to execute wrath upon him that doth evill. 2. It is fal&s;e, that the <HI>Presbyterians</HI> per&s;wade him to <HI>pull out his ovvn eyes,</HI> or to <HI>&s;ee vvith theirs.</HI> 1. For they teach him to learne the Go&s;pell, by reading the Word, and hearing it Preached by the Mini&s;ters thereof, according to Gods Word, and not by every Cobler, as among&s;t Independents in exerci&s;ing their gifts. 2. And afterwards to &s;ee and judge by his owne eyes. 3. They &s;ay and Preach that it is a great &s;in in him, if he judge with any other then his owne eyes. 4. He mu&s;t judge according to the Lawes of the State; otherwi&s;e he doth not the part of a Iudge. 5. Yea if his judgement di&s;&s;ent from the judgement of the Law, we know well enough <HI>he ought to quit</HI> both his owne judgement, and that of the Church, and to judge again&s;t his owne private con&s;cience according to the Law, and his pub|lick con&s;cience which he is bound to have, as a publick per&s;on, conforme to Law; for he &s;itteth not upon the Tribunall as a private, but as a publick Per|&s;on, not as <HI>Iames</HI> or <HI>Charles,</HI> but as King <HI>Iames,</HI> or King <HI>Charles.</HI> So in this there is no policy, as this malignant &s;pirit calumniateth. I omit here his deepe policy in comparing the Civill Magi&s;trate, 1. King, Parliament, &amp;c. with a <HI>Dogge.</HI> 2. And the <HI>Presbytery</HI> with an <HI>Ape:</HI> whether this be not prophanation, and impiety at lea&s;t, and that in a pretty high degree, I &s;ubmit to the judgement of tho&s;e whom it &s;o nearely concerneth, if they be <HI>Apes</HI> I wonder you will call them Brethren. VVhat brother Ape, and &s;o <HI>Apes</HI> your &s;elves, according to your Tenet: &s;o let the Conclu&s;ion hold for you; but we deny
<PB N="32" REF="21">the Antecedent, in &s;o far forth as applyed to Presbyterians.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Obj.</HI> 3. Surely the frame and con&s;titution of Presbyterie is exactly calculated for the Meridian of this pre&s;ent World: And indeed <HI>A. S.</HI> him|&s;elfe is &s;omewhat ingenuous, in acknowledging, that this Government hath little or no relation unto, or compliance with the World, which is to come; profe&s;&s;ing, p. 13. the externall peace of the Church to be the adequate end thereof. The Argument will be thus:</P>
<P>That Government, who&s;e adequate end is the externall peace of the Church, hath no compliance with the world to come, but is calculated for the Meridian of this world:</P>
<P>But Presbyterian Government is a Government, who&s;e adequate end is the Externall peace of the Church, as <HI>A. S.</HI> confe&s;&s;eth, p. 13. <HI>Ergo:</HI> The Pres|byterian Government hath no compliance, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> To be &s;hort here; Note, when I &s;ay, that the peace of the Church is the adequate end of Church-Government; 1. That by the Church-Government, I meane not the Church, according to her e&s;&s;entiall, but to her accidentall or vi&s;ible forme: 2. And con&s;equently, that by Government I meane not the internall Government, which belongeth to her, in re&s;pect of her e&s;&s;entiall, but the externall, which belongeth to her, by rea&s;on of her acci|dentall or vi&s;ible forme: the fir&s;t is proper to Chri&s;t, or God in Chri&s;t, who only hath a domination over our &s;oules. But the &s;econd he exer|ci&s;eth by the Mini&s;tery of men. 3. That by the peace of the Church, I meane not a worldly, but a &s;pirituall peace or quietne&s;&s;e, voyd of Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call trouble, by corruption of Doctrine, Di&s;cipline, or manners; for in the mid&s;t of wordly troubles and per&s;ecutions, this peace may be had; neither can there one word of all this be denyed, &s;ince our di&s;pute here is only about the vi&s;ible Church. 4. That by the word <HI>end</HI> I mean't not, 1. <HI>Finem ultimum &s;impliciter, &s;ed in &s;uo genere,</HI> i. e. not the ultimate end ab&s;olutely, but in its owne kind; nor 2. <HI>Finem operantis Artificis,</HI> or <HI>operis;</HI> but <HI>Artis &amp; Operatio|nis;</HI> not the end of the Agent, of the Arti&s;t, or of his worke; but of the Art or Habitude, whereby he operateth, and of his Operation. Nor 3. the <HI>exter|nall end</HI> of Government, &s;uch as is the World to come, or eternall life; but the <HI>internall end,</HI> which is her peace and quietne&s;&s;e; which however it be an <HI>externall accident of the Churches E&s;&s;ence,</HI> yet it is the <HI>intrin&s;ecall end of her externall Government.</HI> Nor, 4. the <HI>common end of Government,</HI> which is the end of other things al&s;o, as, <HI>the World to come;</HI> which is the end of our Faith, Charity, of all Chri&s;tian vertues, of Di&s;cipline and Government al&s;o, but the proper and particular end thereof. 5. <HI>Non finem obtinendum &s;olum,</HI> but, <HI>pro|ducendum.</HI> And I could not, nor &s;hould have taken it otherwi&s;e, as this man mo&s;t impertinently would have me to doe: for things are defined, notified, and di&s;tingui&s;hed by their internall, proper, ultimate ends in <HI>&s;uo genere,</HI> and that are to be wrought; and not by their extrin&s;ecall, common, ab&s;olutely
<PB N="33" REF="21">ultimate ends, &amp;c. as the Philo&s;ophers doe teach us.</P>
<P>So I an&s;wer, that the Propo&s;ition is fal&s;e; for Church-Government may have the Externall peace of the Church for its adequate, Intrin&s;ecall, proper, ultimate end, <HI>in &s;no genere,</HI> and for the end of Government and Di&s;cipline, which is <HI>finis producendus;</HI> And the <HI>World to come,</HI> for its Extrin&s;ecall, com|mon, ab&s;olutely ultimate end; for the end that is to be obteined, and end of the Agent, and of his worke.</P>
<P>And if it be objected, that the adequate end of Church-Government &s;hould containe in it &s;elfe all its ends, and con&s;equently the life to come. I an&s;wer, that that is mo&s;t fal&s;e, for it containeth only its partiall ends. 2. If it be the Internall end, it containeth not the Externall end thereof: If it be the proper end, it cannot containe the common end, but the common end containeth it: neither is it needfull that it containe the mediate and ultimate ends, or the ultimate ab&s;olutely, and the ultimate in its own kind or &s;ort; for only it con|taineth in it the partiall ends, &s;uch as are not &s;ubordinate, as the mediate and ultimate end, or as the ultimate ab&s;olutely, and in its own kind or &s;ort: And the rea&s;on of it is this; becau&s;e, as <HI>partes</HI> and <HI>compartes,</HI> &s;o partiall ends are <HI>coordinate</HI> and oppo&s;ed one to another, and not <HI>&s;ubordinate,</HI> as the mediate and ultimate end, or as the ultimate ab&s;olutely, and in its own kind, as the Externall peace of the Church, and the VVorld to come.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> 4. The &s;um of <HI>M.S.</HI> his di&s;cour&s;e, p. 33. &sect;. 5. and p. 34. commeth to this; If the civill Magi&s;trate hath not a Directive power in the Church, but the Church-A&s;&s;emblies have it alone; then the Church-A&s;&s;embly mu&s;t have the gift of Infallibility.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> This is a Papi&s;ticall Argument, whereby the Ie&s;uites prove, that the Romi&s;h Church cannot erre: But I an&s;wer him, and Papi&s;ts both.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. I deny this <HI>connexum:</HI> for a Directive power may be, where there is no infallibility. 2. The Independents arrogate to their Congregationall Churches and Presbyteries, a Directive power, without any gift of infallibi|lity. 3. They grant a Directive power unto the Civill Magi&s;trate, whom they grant to be fallible. 4. And howbeit the Civill Magi&s;trate be fallible, yet they will not grant, that the Presbyterie may, or &s;hould iudge over him; no more can the Civill Magi&s;trate judge over the Presbyterie, however it be fallible. 5. For by the &s;ame rea&s;on, any man might judge them both, &s;ince they are both fallible. 6. Howbeit any Iudge, either Secular or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, be fal|lible, yet mu&s;t they be obeyed, till judicially they be convicted of error; other|wi&s;e controver&s;ies &s;hould never be ended, &s;ince wee have no infallible Iudge or Iudgement in this life, unle&s;&s;e God extraordinarily &s;hould reveale it to us.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> 5. After &s;uch &s;tuffe, as we have &s;een, <HI>M. S.</HI> p. 34. &sect;. 2. gue&s;&s;es what I meane by a <HI>Directive power,</HI> and brings three acceptions of it, but all &s;hort of what I meane: The fir&s;t is, that it may &s;ignifie a liberty or power of con|&s;idering,
<PB N="34" REF="22">advi&s;ing, and propo&s;ing of what may be expedient to be done in matters of Religion, and for the good of the Church, which he would have to belong to the <HI>Parliament,</HI> and all others. 2. An Authoritative power, to conclude, &s;ay, and &s;et down what &s;hall, mu&s;t, or ought to be done (again&s;t all contradiction) in <HI>matters of Religion:</HI> and this he grants to God alone; and addeth; If the <HI>Presbyterians</HI> demand &s;uch a <HI>Directive power,</HI> let them ask the Crown, Throne, and Kingdome of <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> al&s;o. To this, <HI>A. S.</HI> &s;aith, that all men may grant it to be true, if they claimed any <HI>&s;overaigne, Royall authoritative power:</HI> But if they claime only a Mini&s;teriall power, it is as great a &s;acrilege to deny them it, as bla&s;phemy in them to arrogate the other, &s;ince they are Gods Mini&s;ters and Amba&s;&s;adors for <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI> 3. A prudentiall faculty or ability to direct, order, or pre&s;cribe, whether to a mans &s;elfe, or to others, what in a way of rea&s;on, humane conjecture, or probability, is be&s;t and fitte&s;t to be done, followed, or imbraced in matters of Religion: and this he grants to the <HI>Parliament,</HI> to many private Members of particular Churches, and to <HI>Presbyteries</HI> and <HI>Synods</HI> al&s;o, how&s;oever with a re&s;triction.</P>
<P>But in all the&s;e his Conjectures, he hath no waies gue&s;&s;ed at my mind: for by a Directive power, however I meane a prudentiall Prudence, yet meane I not a private prudentiall Prudence, which may be found in Midwives, Maid|&s;ervants, and VVater-men; for in granting &s;uch a Power to the Parliament and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Senates, he grants them no more, then to the meane&s;t of the people; but I meane an authoritative publick, and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall pruden|tiall power, not Soveraign, Imperiall, Royall, or De&s;poticall, or Magi&s;teriall; but Mini&s;teriall, &s;uch as may belong to Mini&s;ters, and Amba&s;&s;adours of Chri&s;t: And as I have &s;aid, it is not <GAP DESC="foreign"> or <GAP DESC="foreign"> whereof <HI>Ari&s;totle</HI> &s;peaketh in the Category of Quality, but <GAP DESC="foreign">, no naturall power, no naturall or &s;uperna|turall Habitude; but <HI>Pote&s;tas</HI> or Morall Power depending upon will, and not upon Nature, or that is the work of will, and not of Nature.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VII.</HI> Wherein are di&s;&s;olved his <HI>6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12.</HI> Rea&s;ons borrowed from the Parliaments Ordinance.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Ob.</HI> 6. AFter all his gue&s;&s;ing, &s;o little to purpo&s;e, p. 35. &sect;. 6. he endeavou|reth to prove by the Ordinance of the Parliament for the calling of the A&s;&s;embly, that the Civill Magi&s;trate <HI>doth claime, yea and exerci&s;e, act, and make u&s;e of &s;uch an authority from day to day, as occa&s;ion requireth;</HI> Be|cau&s;e the Parliament publi&s;hed their Ordinance for calling the A&s;&s;embly.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;vv.</HI> I deny the con&s;equence, for that contrivance and publi|&s;hing of their Ordinance, is not a directive power, intrin&s;ecall to the Church, whereof we &s;peake, for neither directs it them intrin&s;ecally in Doctrine, Di&s;cipline or manners, but extrin&s;ecally; 1. becau&s;e the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;embly may be, and hath &s;undry times been convocated without it, as in the Primi|tive
<PB N="35" REF="22">Church. 2. Becau&s;e it was before ever the Synod began, and without any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall act: Now what is before a Synod beginneth, and without any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Act cannot be intrin&s;ecall to the Synod, or to the Church. 3. Becau&s;e the Directive power, whereof I &s;peake, was in <HI>Iudging of Contro|ver&s;ies of Religion, &amp;c.</HI> but the publi&s;hing of an Ordinance for calling the A&s;|&s;embly, is no &s;uch thing. <HI>Ergo,</HI> 4. Becau&s;e that calling of the A&s;&s;embly by Civill Authority alone, was extraordinary, howbeit very ju&s;t and conforme unto Gods Word. Neither could this be an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;embly, unle&s;&s;e it were vertually called by the Church Officers in vertue of their &s;ub&s;equent con&s;ent thereunto: and all the&s;e An&s;wers mu&s;t be taken conjunctly, and not &s;everally. 5. Becau&s;e this A&s;&s;embly is not Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall in vertue of the Ordi|nance of the Parliament, but of the virtuall con&s;ent of the Church. The ver|tuall indiction of it by Church Authority, contributeth to make it intrin&s;ecally Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall: But the Ordinance of the Parliament is extrin&s;ecall unto it, in &s;o farre forth as Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, how&s;oever it be very ju&s;t and nece&s;&s;ary: but it is intrin&s;ecall to it accidentally, and in &s;o farre as is to be received in the State, which ab&s;olutely is extrin&s;ecall to the Church.</P>
<P><HI>Ob. M. S.</HI> In limiting tho&s;e, that were to be of the A&s;&s;embly, to the &s;ub|iect or Argument, on which it was permitted them to debate; they did no le&s;&s;e, <HI>i. e. they exerci&s;ed a directive power.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. But this is no intrin&s;ecall directive power, whereof I &s;peake, viz. in Teaching, Preaching, judgeing of Controver&s;ies of Religion, &amp;c. 2. This was no Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, but a Civill Power. 3. In &s;o doing, the Parliament judged not what was to be beleeved or practi&s;ed in the Church, but ordained them to judge, which is the true intrin&s;ecall, directive power. 4. And this was extraordinary in re&s;pect of Gods <HI>particular,</HI> howbeit not in re&s;pect of his <HI>generall Providence</HI> in the Government of his Church.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 8. In appointing and ordering them not to determine or con|clude of things, as they plea&s;ed, by Pluralities of Votes, <HI>but to deliver their Opinions and advices as &s;hould be mo&s;t agreeable to the Word of God</HI> (another provi&s;o in the Ordinance) they did the &s;ame.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. <HI>M.S.</HI> would here &s;eem to give &s;ome great power unto the Parlia|ment in matters of Religion, &amp; yet it is nothing el&s;e, but that, which he grants to too many private Members of particular Churches. So that if the King and Parliament will become Members of this <HI>M.</HI> S. his Church, and He plea&s;e to admit them, it may be, that he will grant them as much power, as to other private Members thereof. 2. Note, that he &s;aies not, that it <HI>belongs</HI> unto them, but, that they <HI>claime</HI> it, <HI>exerci&s;e, act,</HI> and <HI>make u&s;e of it;</HI> but <HI>quo jure, quave injuri&acirc;,</HI> he telleth not. 3. In all this there appeareth no <HI>intrin&s;ecall,</HI> or <HI>Eccle|&s;ia&s;ticall Power,</HI> they did it not by a <HI>Spirituall,</HI> but by a <HI>Secular Power.</HI> 4. And if the Church had not a <HI>Spirituall</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power</HI> to determine; and to conclude, what needed the Parliament to forbid it the Synod, rather
<PB N="36" REF="23">then ordinary Trade&s;men, who have no &s;uch power to determine &s;uch matters. 5. Neither by this command is it the <HI>Parliaments</HI> mind, as I beleeve, to take away from the <HI>Church</HI> the <HI>directive</HI> and <HI>intrin&s;ecall Power,</HI> that God hath granted her, but only to de&s;ire her to put off her <HI>Determinations,</HI> till it &s;ee how farre it can prevaile by faire meanes to gaine pertinacious men, who may op|po<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">e it; and happily al&s;o till it receive full &s;atisfaction it &s;elfe, before it con|firme &s;uch <HI>Determinations</HI> by an Act of Parliament, and &s;o make them to be received by their authority in the State; for the Parliament hath no le&s;&s;e Ci|vill and Secular Authority to receive, or not receive it by a Civill Law into the &s;tate, then any Synod hath &s;pirituall authority to e&s;tabli&s;h, or not e&s;tabli&s;h it by an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Law in the Church. Wherefore in this the Parliament intended not to cro&s;&s;e the Church Government, nor to be cro&s;&s;ed in their Civill Government by the Church, as in former times, but to live together, as <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Aaron,</HI> both looking to one end, but each one of them with their owne eyes, the one with a Politicall, the other with a Spirituall or Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call eye. And this appeareth by tho&s;e words of the Ordinance, <HI>during this pre&s;ent Parliament, or untill further order be taken.</HI> Now, if this Order were full, what needed the Synod attend for a further Order? Neither is there any man of judgement, that can blame the Parliament in all this, yea howbeit it &s;hould extraordinarily doe more in this extraordinarily mi&s;erable e&s;tate of Religion, when now Sathan hath &s;o manife&s;t and palpable an entrance into the Church of God, under &s;o many ill-portending &s;hapes, as of Independents, Browni&s;ts, Anabapti&s;ts, Socinians, &amp;c. they had need take upon them, for the defence of the Church, more then in ordinary ca&s;es they doe. 7. Only I adde a word, viz. that the&s;e words <HI>(as they plea&s;ed by plurality of Votes)</HI> are not in the Ordinance, but are an addition of <HI>M. S.</HI> in contempt of the Sy|nod, as if the Members thereof voted not according to Scripture, but as <HI>plea&s;ed</HI> them&s;elves. And 8. that in ca&s;e of <HI>difference</HI> in <HI>Opinion,</HI> it is not or|dained, that they repre&s;ent their Opinions, and the rea&s;ons thereof, to either or both the Hou&s;es, to the end that they may judge of the matter, but that they may finde out &s;ome further direction, whereby the A&s;&s;embly may judge it. 9. Yea there is another Ordinance &s;ince the printed Ordinance, whereby it is ordained, that all things agreed upon and prepared for the Parliament &s;hould be openly read, and allowed in the A&s;&s;embly, and then offered, as the judgement of the A&s;&s;embly, if the Major part con&s;ent: &s;ee how the judge|ment of the Major part of the A&s;&s;embly is here declared by the Parliament, to be acknowledged, as the Deci&s;ion of the A&s;&s;embly, which <HI>M. S.</HI> will not &s;tand unto.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> 9. In enjoyning them, <HI>in ca&s;e of difference of opinions between them, to pre&s;ent the &s;ame, together with the rea&s;ons thereof, to both Hou&s;es;</HI> they did every whit as much.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. I deny that they who enjoyne, in ca&s;e of difference, &amp;c. have
<PB N="37" REF="23">an Internall power in the Church, much le&s;&s;e an internall Directive power. 2. This injunctio~ was not in reference to the Intrin&s;ecal power of the Church, which is evermore within the Church; but to the Extrin&s;ecall power about the Church, i.e. to that of the Magi&s;trate, who&s;e power is without the Church, how&s;oever within the State; and in &s;o far forth as the <HI>Parliament,</HI> by Civill Law, intended to approve and confirme the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Law. 3. <HI>Item,</HI> it was to &s;ee, if by any meanes and wayes of meekne&s;&s;e, it could per&s;wade a few men of your Sect to &s;ubmit them&s;elves unto the Order and Government that God hath e&s;tabli&s;hed in his Church; as they have done you many other favours, which you too much undervalue, arguing from this favour, as from a Law, to that which is, or &s;hould be ordinary Iu&s;tice. And yet they ordai|ned, that what is caried by plurality of Votes in the A&s;&s;embly, &s;hould pa&s;&s;e as the judgement of the whole A&s;&s;embly.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> 10. <HI>M.S.</HI> In their nominating and calling &s;uch and &s;uch Mini&s;ters, and not others, to be of the A&s;&s;embly, they acted the &s;ame power.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> That is al&s;o Extrin&s;ecall, &s;ince it was not in, but out of, and before the A&s;&s;embly. 2. And extraordinary. 3. And yet very ordinate and ordinary for this extraordinary &s;tate of the Church in this Kingdome, when &s;uch a &s;warme of Sects are crept in; &s;ome comming from <HI>New England,</HI> o|thers from the <HI>Netherlands,</HI> and others from other places: For, if every one of them &s;hould have had entry into the A&s;&s;embly, what &s;hould have become of us? 4. Neither doth this prove any Directive power in the Church, in teaching, &amp;c. (as I &s;aid) that &s;hould belong unto the Magi&s;trate.</P>
<P><HI>M.S. Ob.</HI> 11. In framing the temper and con&s;titution of the A&s;&s;embly, al|laying it with &s;uch and &s;uch Members of their own, they &s;teered the &s;ame cour&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. This cannot conclude any Directive, Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power that belongeth unto the <HI>Parliament.</HI> 2. The&s;e Members of their own, who did &s;it in the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> if they had any Vote, did not &s;it there in quality of Members of the <HI>A&s;&s;embly;</HI> for then every Member of the <HI>Parliament</HI> might have &s;ate there: but in quality of extraordinary Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;ons, ac|cording to this extraordinary &s;tate and exigence of the Church. 3. If they had no Vote at all, and yet &s;ate, they were not Members of the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> but this was a &s;peciall priviledge granted unto the Members of the Hou&s;e, which in other places likewi&s;e is granted unto per&s;ons of meaner rank, yea unto Strangers, as we may &s;ee in the Church of <HI>Scotland,</HI> in their Generall A&s;&s;emblies. 4. Or rather they &s;it there in name of the <HI>Parliament,</HI> to procure by their Civill power, the Externall order that &s;hould be in &s;uch A&s;&s;emblies: But this is no Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall or Internall power in the Church, but Externall about the Church, &s;uch as the <HI>French Kings Commi&s;&s;ioners</HI> (who are &s;ometimes Papi&s;ts) have in our Prote&s;tant Nationall Synods in <HI>France,</HI> and yet are not Members of our Synods there, neither Vote they, nei|ther
<PB N="38" REF="24">pretend they to have any Intrin&s;ecall power there; for then they &s;hould profe&s;&s;e them&s;elves thereby to be Prote&s;tants; only they have power to oppo&s;e things, that they beleeve to be prejudiciall to the King or the State. 5. Neither beleeve I, that they vote in points of Doctrine. 6. And if they vote in matter of Government, they doe it in quality of Ruling Elders, either extraordinary or ordinary, in vertue of &s;ome virtuall election made by the Synod, or by the Synods toleration, or approbation; for no man can rule the Church intrin|&s;ecally, but he that is intrin&s;ecally a Church-Ruler or Officer, as I have proved it heretofore.</P>
<P><HI>M.S. Object.</HI> 12. La&s;tly, in their me&s;&s;ages or Directions &s;ent unto them from time to time, how to proceed, what particulars to wave for the pre&s;ent, what to fall upon, and debate, To ha&s;ten the i&s;&s;ue of their Con&s;ultations; with the like: What doe they el&s;e, but claime and exerci&s;e &s;uch a <HI>Directive power in matters of Religion?</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> To <HI>proceed, to wave particulars, to debate things,</HI> and <HI>con|&s;ult</HI> of them in the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> argueth an intrin&s;ecall directive power, proper unto the <HI>Church:</HI> but to &s;end Me&s;&s;ages, proveth it not at all to be in the <HI>Parliament,</HI> but in the <HI>Church;</HI> and that the Magi&s;trate, by his Civill power, can command the <HI>Church</HI> to u&s;e its Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power. 2. For the Magi|&s;trate may command the like thing to every Guild or Common-Hall in the City, touching their own profe&s;&s;ions: Neither can it thereupon be inferred, that he hath an Intrin&s;ecall Directive power in &s;uch Trades.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VIII</HI> Wherein are an&s;wered his <HI>13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20.</HI> Arguments.</HEAD>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> p. 37. &sect;. 1. <HI>Ob.</HI> 13. BUt if the <HI>Parliament</HI> have no calling from God, to judge of matters between the <HI>Apologi&s;ts,</HI> and their Brethren (the <HI>A&s;|&s;emblers</HI>) I would willingly know who hath?</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> The <HI>Parliament</HI> hath power, and a calling to judge <HI>Politic&egrave;</HI> about the Church and Church matters; What Deci&s;ions and Con&s;titutions of the Church A&s;&s;emblies, they will approve, or di&s;approve; what Religion, Doctrine, and Di&s;cipline they will admit or tolerate in the State: But they have no calling, or Directive Authoritative power in the Church, to judge this or that to be the true Doctrine or Di&s;cipline: this belongeth to Church-Officers: Yet they have a private judgement of Di&s;cretion about &s;uch matters, as other Chri&s;tians; and a publique Politicall Authoritative judgement, and a coactive Politicall power, to compell the Subjects to admit in the State &s;uch or &s;uch a true Doctrine or Di&s;cipline of the Church, howbeit not to beleeve it, or to love or approve it in their judgement or will.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 14. asketh, Whether it be rea&s;onable, that the <HI>Apologi&s;ts</HI> mat|ters yet remaining undecided and unjudged between them and their Bre|thren, &s;hould &s;uffer as men convicted, only becau&s;e their Adver&s;aries and
<PB N="39" REF="24">Accu&s;ers (the Brethren ye know of) are more in number then they, and will needs continue Adver&s;aries to them?</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. Though yee vaunt evermore of your &s;ufferings, we have never &s;een them. 2. The&s;e, whom ye unju&s;tly call your Adver&s;aries, have &s;uffered much more then you, and yet publi&s;h it not unto the World. 3. It is ab&s;olutely fal&s;e, that ye &s;uffer. 4. And yet much fal&s;er, that ye &s;uffer as men convicted. 5. And yet fal&s;er, that ye &s;uffer, becau&s;e your Adver&s;aries are more in number. And 6. fal&s;e&s;t of all, that only ye &s;uffer for that. 7. Men that &s;uffer are not honoured, as ye are, neither receive they &s;o great favours, Pre&s;ents, and Benefices, as ye doe. 8. It is a great &s;ufferance to the Church of God, to be calumniated and upbraided by &s;o contemptible a number of Mi|ni&s;ters, and to &s;ee &s;o many Libels printed again&s;t her by tho&s;e of your Sect. 9. It is fal&s;e, that ye are not condemned: for the Church of <HI>England,</HI> and all other Prote&s;tant Churches, in approving the Presbyterian Government, as we &s;aid heretofore, could not but di&s;prove and condemne you all, who condemn it. 10. Neither doth all this prove a Directive Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, belong|ing to the Civill Magi&s;trate. 11. Ye have no Adver&s;aries here, but your Fal&s;e Opinions. 12. Neither are your Brethren Adver&s;aries to you, but to your erronions Opinions, which are a thou&s;and times more your Adver&s;aries then they. 13. And both ye, and any of us, mu&s;t legally &s;uffer according to our demerits, when we are &s;ufficiently convicted and condemned by plurality of Votes, <HI>in foro externo,</HI> as ye are already, in very many things: for this is the way of all Civill and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories; Neither can Independents change it.</P>
<P N="15">15. <HI>Ibid. M.S.</HI> rea&s;oneth thus: If our Saviours te&s;timony concerning him|&s;elfe, in his own cau&s;e, was not valid; how much le&s;&s;e the te&s;timony of any other, yea of a thou&s;and, in any matter, that concerneth them&s;elves, and con|&s;equently that of our Brethren in the Synod? But the fir&s;t is true, <HI>Joh.</HI> 5.31. <HI>If I beare witne&s;&s;e of my &s;elfe, my witne&s;&s;e is not true,</HI> i. e. it is not in a formall and Legall interpretation true, but you may rea&s;onably wave it.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;.</HI> 1. Either <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> here &s;peaking of his own te&s;timony, &s;peaketh of him&s;elfe according to his Divine, to his Humane, or according to both his Natures. Item, 2. Either he &s;peaketh of its validity in it &s;elfe, or in re&s;pect of the Iewes, to whom he did &s;peak, and who &s;hould have admitted of it. Item, 3. Either of his publique and judiciall, or of his private te&s;timony:
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. If in the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition we take our Saviour according to his Divine nature, or according to both, viz. as Mediator, the A&s;&s;umption is fal&s;e; for there <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;peaketh not of him&s;elfe according to his Divine Nature, or to both, or as Mediator; for under that notion he is Iudge of quick and dead: and <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;ayes, <HI>Ioh.</HI> 8.14. that <HI>if he te&s;tifie of him&s;elfe, his te&s;timony is true.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>2. Or if he &s;peak of him&s;elfe under this notion, then he &s;peaketh not of his te&s;timony, as it is in it &s;elf, but as it is in re&s;pect of them, who received
<PB N="40" REF="25">it not, viz the Iewes, and unbeleevers, who received it not as the te&s;timony of God, or of the Mediator, (however it was &s;uch) for they knew him not, <HI>Ioh.</HI> 8.15.19. but <HI>they judged according to the fle&s;h neither knew they him, nor his Father:</HI> And if they had known the King of Glory, they had never crucified him. And then the Propo&s;ition is fal&s;e: for it followeth not, that if <HI>Chri&s;ts</HI> te&s;timony, who is <HI>God,</HI> was not acknowledged as valid by tho&s;e who knew it not; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the te&s;timony of a Presbytery or Synod &s;hould not be acknow|ledged by &s;uch as are &s;ubject thereunto, and know it: for by the &s;ame rea&s;on, two or three idle fellowes &s;hould not beleeve the te&s;timony of your Presby|tery or A&s;&s;embly.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. I retort then the Argument:
<LIST>
<ITEM>If <HI>Chri&s;ts</HI> te&s;timony was not legally valid in his own cau&s;e; <HI>Ergo,</HI> Yours, in your Presbyteries and A&s;&s;emblies, is not legally true, or valid in your own cau&s;e, when ye judge in matters of Faith and and Di&s;cipline,</ITEM>
<ITEM>But the fir&s;t is true: <HI>Ergo,</HI> the &s;econd al&s;o.</ITEM>
</LIST></ITEM>
<ITEM>4. If Chri&s;t be here taken according to his Humane Nature; then either he is taken according to his Humane nature, as it is in it &s;elfe without &s;inne, or as it was in the Phari&s;es e&s;timation. If in the fir&s;t way, the A&s;&s;umption is fal&s;e; for there the Phari&s;es took Chri&s;t for a &s;infull man: and who can deny, but that the te&s;timony of a man, in the &s;tate of integrity, is valid?</ITEM>
<ITEM>5. If it be taken in the &s;econd way, I deny the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition for the te&s;timony of Iudges, in judging according to Law, in things that concerne not &s;o much their per&s;ons, as the Society that they repre&s;ent in judgement, as the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> and all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudges doe, is to be preferred before the te&s;timony of any particular man.</ITEM>
<ITEM>6. And if this Maxime of the Independents hold, the judgement of no Ci|vill Magi&s;trate yea not of the <HI>Parliament</HI> it &s;elfe &s;h<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">ll hold, if any of them, or any D<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">linquent, take the <HI>Parliament</HI> to party in any bu&s;ine&s;&s;e. The <HI>Parlia|ment</HI> will doe well to take notice of &s;uch Independent Maximes.</ITEM>
<ITEM>7. But this was the Arminians way, at the Synod of <HI>Dort,</HI> to the end they might decline the judgement of the Synod: and he is an Arminian who pro|pounds this Argument, who of late is become an Independent: I <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">eare, they mean to unite the two Sects in one.</ITEM>
<ITEM>8. Chri&s;t was not here &s;peaking of him&s;elfe, how far forth his te&s;timony and judgement might hold in a judiciall way, (whereof we &s;peak here) but in a private way; for this action was not judiciall, but a particular di&s;|cour&s;e.</ITEM>
<ITEM>9. Neither are the bu&s;ine&s;&s;es now in hand at the <HI>Synod,</HI> of particular, but of publike concernment, viz. the <HI>Church;</HI> wherein the Church, that is Iudge, cannot be taken to party, however ye call her a <HI>crowd,</HI> wherein many parti|cular per&s;ons are concerned.</ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<PB N="41" REF="25">
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 16. p. 37. &sect;. 2. They who are Party, cannot be their Parties Judge, &s;ince they are all equals, <HI>Et par in parem non habet imperium;</HI> and to be both Iudge, and Party in one cau&s;e, cannot be granted to tho&s;e, that have no authoritative power one over another, as <HI>A.S.</HI> him&s;elfe affirmes. But the A&s;&s;embly are tho&s;e, who are Party to the Independents, and nothing el&s;e, but their equals, <HI>Ergo</HI> the A&s;&s;embly cannot be their Judges.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;.</HI> A Party cannot judge a Party; I di&s;tingui&s;h, for either this Par|ty is only pretended, and &s;o I deny the Major; or reall; and then this reall Party either compeareth in &s;ome per&s;onall, or reall actions of his owne alone; or in &s;ome cau&s;e of publick concernment: if he compeare under the fir&s;t noti|on, the Major is true, but the Minor is fal&s;e; for the Members of the A&s;&s;embly compeare not in the A&s;&s;embly for any per&s;onall or reall action of their owne alone, or of particular concernment: if he compeareth under the &s;econd no|tion, the Major is fal&s;e, unle&s;&s;e yee have &s;ufficient cau&s;e to for&s;ake him for Iudge. 2. <HI>Item,</HI> If it be a Party, that hath no power over the Party in &s;uch a cau&s;e, the Major is true, but the Minor is fal&s;e; for the A&s;&s;embly in matters of Di&s;cipline hath power over all the Independents in England, viz. to con|demne their Tenets according to Gods VVord: If it be a party, that hath po|wer over the Party in &s;uch a cau&s;e, as a Iudge, the Major is fal&s;e, and &s;o it was rea&s;oned, and this your Tenet judged, and condemned in the Arminians, as I hope, it &s;hall be in this Arminian and the Independents, in this A&s;&s;embly. 3. It is fal&s;e that parties are equals, when the one hath power over ano|ther; or when the one, that is pretended to be party, judgeth not in a matter concerning him&s;elfe, but the publick. 4. For if that &s;hould hold, the parties of the Independent Churches might reject the judgement of whole Churches, yea of all the Churches of the world, pretending them to be parties. 5. Yea for the &s;ame rea&s;on they might reject the Iudgement of the Parliament. 6. This Argument proveth not the que&s;tion, viz. that the Parliament hath an intrin&s;e|call, directive power in matters of Religion, or an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, to judge in matters of Religion. 7. It is a very proud and Independent expre&s;|&s;ion of yours, when you &s;ay, that the Synod and all the Churches in the Chri|&s;tian world are but the Apologi&s;ts equals; you will finde them, I hope in God, their Judges; and yet they are put in authority by the Parliament, to repre&s;ent the whole Church of England, which is more then &s;uch an incon&s;ide|rable number of Independents.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 17. p. 37. &sect;. 2. <HI>If all Churches vvere equall,</HI> (as for ought I know, or for any thing <HI>A.S.</HI> alledgeth to the contrary, they are) there can be neither &s;uperiours, nor inferiours, and con&s;equently no obedience or di&s;o|bedience: But the fir&s;t is true.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;.</HI> 1. This proveth not that the Parliament hath any <HI>intrin&s;ecall povver</HI> in the Church; much le&s;&s;e any <HI>directive intrin&s;ecall povver.</HI> 2. Only it pretendeth to prove an <HI>Independent Povver</HI> in the <HI>Church,</HI> which taketh a|way
<PB N="42" REF="26">their <HI>directive povver</HI> of the Civill Magi&s;trate, and the Parliament; for if their Churches depend not of any &s;uperiour, how can they depend upon the Parliament, or any other Civill Magi&s;trate? I deny the A&s;&s;umption, viz. that all Churches are equall; but he proveth it, becau&s;e they are &s;uch for ought he knoweth, or that <HI>A.</HI> S. alleadgeth to the contrary. <HI>An&s;vv.</HI> 1. This is, but to confe&s;&s;e your ignorance. 2. I deny the Con&s;equence, for it may be otherwi&s;e, howbeit he be ignorant of it. 3. Neither is his knowledge the mea&s;ure of di|vine, or naturall verity, but to be mea&s;ured by them. 4. Howbeit <HI>A. S.</HI> &s;hould &s;ay nothing to the contrary, yet the contrary may be; for <HI>A. S.</HI> hath not &s;aid all things, that may be &s;aid upon this, or any other &s;ubject: and there be thou&s;ands, who can &s;ay more, and better then he; yea, many have &s;aid more and better. 5. It is an untruth al&s;o, that he hath &s;aid nothing to the contrary, for he might have &s;eene &s;omething to the contrary in his <HI>Ob&s;ervations,</HI> and in his <HI>An&s;wers</HI> to a Libell; and if that be not enough, he hath more in this <HI>Booke.</HI> 6. When he &s;aith that <HI>A. S.</HI> argueth &s;o, it is an untruth; for neither hath <HI>A.</HI> S. the A&s;&s;umption, nor the Conclu&s;ion, in the 38. page of his <HI>Ob&s;er|vations</HI> cited by him, for he de&s;troyeth the <HI>Con&s;equent</HI> to de&s;troy the <HI>Antece|dent:</HI> whereas <HI>M. S. po&s;eth</HI> the <HI>Antecedent</HI> to <HI>infer</HI> the <HI>Con&s;equent.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 18. If Iu&s;tice con&s;i&s;teth not in an Arithmeticall, but Geometri|call proportion, then is there no rea&s;on, that peremptoriou&s;ne&s;&s;e of Vote, how Arithmetically &s;oever priviledged, but weight and worth of Argu|ments &s;hould carry it again&s;t them. But the fir&s;t is true, <HI>Ergo</HI> the &s;econd al&s;o.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;vv.</HI> This Argument with its <HI>peremptorious cen&s;ure</HI> of a <HI>pretended peremptoriou&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Votes, Arithmetically priviledged,</HI> &s;eemeth to cen&s;ure the Parliament, which ordained, that that &s;hould be offered unto them, <HI>as the Iudgement of the A&s;&s;embly, vvhich the major part a&s;&s;ented unto. i. e.</HI> that, that was judged by Plurality of Votes. 2. If by <HI>peremptoriou&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Vote,</HI> he mea|neth <HI>Plurality of Votes,</HI> I deny the <HI>con&s;equence</HI> or <HI>connexion;</HI> for when things are fully ballanced by rea&s;on, in any A&s;&s;embly, it is more probable, that that is mo&s;t true, that is carried by <HI>plurality of votes,</HI> and that <HI>Geometricall proportion,</HI> wherein con&s;i&s;teth <HI>di&s;tributive Iu&s;tice,</HI> may be more ea&s;ily found out by <HI>Plura|rity of votes,</HI> then by fewer votes; otherwi&s;e it were a folly to vote any thing; for wherefore vote they any thing in any A&s;&s;emblies, but that it may be judged by <HI>plurality of votes?</HI> 3. And the Apo&s;tle willeth, that the &s;pirit of Prophets be &s;ubject to the Prophets: Neither is it credible, that the Major part will &s;ubmit unto the le&s;&s;er part. 4. And we would willingly know of you, Sir, how things are ordinarily carried in your A&s;&s;emblies? whether things being debated, and every mans Rea&s;ons heard, the Major part &s;ub|mitteth to the le&s;&s;er, or the le&s;&s;er to the Major? or whether that is thought truth, that the Major or Minor part Voteth? 5. If by <HI>peremptoriou&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>votes,</HI> you mean a bold and imperious carrying of things by <HI>plurality of votes,</HI>
<PB N="43" REF="26">without rea&s;on, I &s;hall readily grant you &s;uch A&s;&s;emblies are unlawfull; nei|ther is there any &s;uch e&s;tabli&s;hed among&s;t us; neither hath the Parliament e&s;tabli&s;hed any &s;uch Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;embly here; neither doth the A&s;&s;embly arrogate unto it &s;elfe any &s;uch unju&s;t power: if this Argument hold, it &s;hall beate downe as well the proceedings of the Parliament; and all Civill Iudica|tories, wherein things are carried by <HI>Plurality of votes,</HI> as tho&s;e of the A&s;&s;em|bly: wherefore all the Civill Powers in the world will doe well to take notice of this <HI>peremptorious cen&s;ure</HI> of them all; for if it &s;tand, they mu&s;t fall and doe homage to the <HI>Independent</HI> Churches. Be&s;ides this, I know not what he mea|neth by <HI>Arithmetically priviledged;</HI> for it is no terme either in Divinity, or in Lawes, or in Philo&s;ophy, for any thing I know: Neither heard I ever before of any <HI>Arithmeticall priviledge.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Obj.</HI> 19. <HI>M.</HI> S. What is granted to every other man in the Kingdome, can|not be denyed to the Parliament.</P>
<P>But a calling to judge between, the Apologi&s;ts, and their Brethren, yea, and &s;omewhat more then a calling a &s;peciall and weighty nece&s;&s;ity to doe it (though not after the &s;ame manner, in re&s;pect of the con&s;equence of their judgement) is granted to every other man in the Kingdome. <HI>Ergo</HI> a calling to Iudge, &amp;c. cannot be denyed to the Parliament.</P>
<P><HI>A.</HI> S. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> Howbeit I might &s;ay much to the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition, 1. yet I deny the A&s;&s;umption, if it be taken ab&s;olutely: Or rather 2. to evite his cavillati|ons, I di&s;tingui&s;h it: if by the word <HI>calling</HI> he meane a <HI>publick</HI> and <HI>particular calling,</HI> &s;uch as have the Officers, and Mini&s;ters, or Rulers of the Church; it is fal&s;e; for no man hath &s;uch a <HI>calling,</HI> but he who is called, as <HI>Aaron:</HI> if He meane a <HI>private</HI> or <HI>common calling.</HI> I grant him all the Argument, but it is no|thing to the purpo&s;e; for by &s;uch a <HI>calling</HI> they cannot judge in <HI>Publicke</HI> or in <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies.</HI> 3. I di&s;tingui&s;h the word <HI>judge,</HI> for either it &s;ignifies an <HI>Officiall, Publicke, Mini&s;teriall,</HI> and <HI>authoritative judgement;</HI> or a <HI>private common judgement</HI> of <HI>di&s;cretion,</HI> &s;uch as belongeth to <HI>women,</HI> and all Chri&s;tians: if the fir&s;t, the Minor is fal&s;e; for what nece&s;&s;ity can lye upon every private man, yea, Water-men, Coblers, and Oy&s;ter-women to goe to the A&s;&s;embly, and judge between the Apologi&s;ts and them? If &s;o, the Parlia|ment hath done them wrong, in not calling of them, or rather in excluding them from &s;o noble and nece&s;&s;ary acts of their <HI>calling.</HI> And here I mu&s;t pray the Parliament to con&s;ider, whether this Doctrine of his in this point be not &s;editious, and &s;ufficient to excitate the ignorant people to challenge &s;uch a pretended <HI>calling</HI> and liberty, or licentiou&s;ne&s;&s;e of judgement? If every one be a Iudge to Rule, who &s;hall be ruled? If every one command, who &s;hall o|bey? how then hath the Apo&s;tle di&s;tingui&s;hed Rulers from others? If the &s;o|cond, we grant him all the Argument; but that <HI>conclu&s;ion</HI> in that &s;ence is not the <HI>que&s;tion,</HI> that is <HI>controver&s;ed</HI> between us.</P>
<P>But 20. <HI>Arg. M. S.</HI> &s;eemes to prove the <HI>A&s;&s;umption,</HI> if it be not a new Ar|gument:
<PB N="44" REF="27"><HI>Would</HI> A. S. <HI>have even the meane&s;t of men to &s;ing obedience and &s;ub|mi&s;&s;ion to the A&s;&s;embly, without their under&s;tanding?</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> I retort the Argument: 1. Will <HI>M.S.</HI> have even the meane&s;t of men to &s;ing obedience and &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to the <HI>King, Parliament,</HI> or any <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> without their under&s;tanding? 2. Would M. S. have even the meane&s;t to &s;ing obedience to the <HI>Independent Churches,</HI> without their under|&s;tanding? 3. The Church mu&s;t u&s;e all po&s;&s;ible meanes to informe &s;uch as pre|tend ignorance, or con&s;cience: having &s;ufficiently convicted them, &s;he mu&s;t proceed again&s;t them as contumacious, and inflict upon them &s;uch &s;pirituall puni&s;hments, as their &s;innes may de&s;erve. 4. In &s;uch a c<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters">e, not only the <HI>mea|ne&s;t,</HI> but al&s;o the <HI>greate&s;t</HI> mu&s;t &s;ing <HI>obedience pa&s;&s;i<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">&egrave;,</HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> &s;uff<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters">ing the Churches proceedings again&s;t them; <HI>pormittendo, tolerando, no<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word">; in permit|ting the Church to proceed again&s;t them, in tolera<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="3 letters"> nor judgement, in not re&s;i&s;ting it: for it is an old &s;aying of a very wi&s;e Scoick: <HI>Tolerand<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"> &s;unt, quae emendari non po&s;&s;unt:</HI> &s;ince particular per&s;ons have no publike vocation or power to oppo&s;e the Church, <HI>activ&eacute;,</HI> they mu&s;t &s;uffer; yet they may <HI>re&s;i&s;t</HI> in not obeying <HI>activ&egrave;,</HI> as in confe&s;&s;ing an untruth, in ca&s;e the Charch urge them thereunto: Or, in a word, they mu&s;t obey, in ca&s;e they be not made Actors in things again&s;t their Con&s;cience; for it is no &s;inne to &s;uffer what we cannot mend; but to doe what we &s;hould not doe, or omit what we &s;hould doe, and may doe.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> 21. If the meane&s;t of men have not a <HI>calling</HI> to <HI>judge</HI> betwixt the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> and the <HI>Independents,</HI> then they mu&s;t &s;ing <HI>obedience</HI> and &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> without their under&s;tanding. But the <HI>Con&s;equent</HI> is fal&s;e, <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;o is the <HI>Antecedent</HI> al&s;o.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> I deny the Con&s;equence of the <HI>fir&s;t Propo&s;ition:</HI> for to <HI>&s;ing obedience</HI> to the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> it is not needfull, that one be Iudge betwixt them and the <HI>Independents;</HI> but, that they know whether the Iudgement of the <HI>A&s;|&s;embly</HI> be ju&s;t, or not, or rather, whether their Obedience be ju&s;t, or not: for the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> and they who have power to judge, may judge ju&s;tly; and he who is judged, ju&s;tly di&s;obey: as, if a man &s;hould legally, <HI>in foro Externo,</HI> be convicted of Here&s;ie, or any other crime, the fact being proved by fal&s;e wit|ne&s;&s;es, and he afterwards condemned to acknowledge an Here&s;ie or crime; both the judgement &s;hould be ju&s;t, for the Iudges judged ju&s;tly, <HI>juxta alle|gata &amp; probata;</HI> but the Obedience to &s;uch a judgement &s;hould be unju&s;t, and his di&s;obedience ju&s;t; for he &s;hould &s;inne grievou&s;ly again&s;t God, and give offence to his Neighbour, in acknowledging an Here&s;ie, or a filthy crime, where there is none at all. 2. By a <HI>calling</HI> to <HI>judge,</HI> either he under&s;tands a <HI>publike</HI> and <HI>particular calling</HI> to judge <HI>authoritativ&egrave;,</HI> in con&s;ulting in Eccle&s;i|a&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies of matters of Religion, and deciding them, and &s;o indu|cing an obligation unto obedience; or a <HI>common</HI> and <HI>private calling,</HI> out of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies, by him&s;elfe alone, or in private with a friend, to
<PB N="45" REF="27"><HI>judge</HI> by a <HI>judgement</HI> of <HI>di&s;cretion,</HI> which induceth no bond or obligation to <HI>obedience.</HI> If by a <HI>Calling</HI> he meane the fir&s;t, the fir&s;t <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> is fal&s;e; nei|ther will all the Independents, Arminians, Anabapti&s;ts, and Socinians ever be able to prove it. If the &s;econd, all the Argument may be granted, viz. That the <HI>meane&s;t</HI> of <HI>men</HI> have a <HI>common calling</HI> to <HI>judge</HI> by <HI>judgement of Di&s;cretion,</HI> (which induceth no <HI>obligation</HI>) betwixt the Synod, and the Independents: but that is not the Que&s;tion in debate. 3. I di&s;tingui&s;h the word <HI>obedience</HI> and &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion; for either this <HI>obedience</HI> is <HI>activ&egrave;,</HI> when we are commanded by our Superiours, to be Agents or Actors in any thing, as to bow before an Idol, or Religiou&s;ly to adore Altars, the Bread and Wine at the Lords Table, &amp;c. Or <HI>permi&s;&s;iv&egrave;,</HI> when I am not commanded to be an Actor, or to doe any thing, but to permit it, not hinder it, or not oppo&s;e it, if I doe it not my &s;elf; as when men are exhorted, or commanded to a&s;&s;i&s;t the poore; if I will not a&s;&s;i&s;t them, I am bound not to oppo&s;e the Command, or to hinder others from doing it: &s;o, if a Mini&s;ter preach not according to my palate, whatever be my private judgment of him, as if he preach too &s;ublimely, too &s;peculatively, le&s;&s;e methodi|cally, &amp;c. yet mu&s;t I let him alone, I may not oppo&s;e or cro&s;&s;e him, becau&s;e that I have no <HI>publike calling</HI> to <HI>cen&s;ure</HI> or hinder him. If <HI>obedience</HI> be taken in the fir&s;t way, the fir&s;t <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> is fal&s;e; for every man in <HI>obeying actively,</HI> or when he is an Actor, mu&s;t know whether he doth well, or ill, at lea&s;t by a par|ticular judgement: if in the <HI>&s;econd,</HI> it is true, that men are bound &s;ometimes to <HI>&s;ing</HI> a <HI>permi&s;&s;ive obedience,</HI> without their <HI>under&s;tanding,</HI> becau&s;e in &s;o do|ing, they doe nothing them&s;elves, but permit other men to doe; as when there is a Mini&s;ter called by the Church to <HI>preach,</HI> it may be, that &s;ome ordi|nary Mechanick will judge his Sermons to be too &s;ublime, more &s;peculative then practicall, happily al&s;o he will think them not methodicall: in &s;uch a ca&s;e the Mechanick hath no power to hinder the Preacher from preaching, or preaching &s;o; he mu&s;t obey in permitting, and not oppo&s;ing him in preaching; for what is un&s;avory to his palate, is &s;avory to anothers. 4. If this Argument hold, it &s;hall pre&s;&s;e no le&s;&s;e the Parliament, then the A&s;&s;embly: for I put the ca&s;e that the A&s;&s;embly judge, and that all the A&s;&s;embly and Independents goe one way, and the Parliament another, which, I tru&s;t in God, &s;hall never happen: I frame the Argument thus:</P>
<P>If the <HI>meane&s;t</HI> of <HI>men</HI> have not a <HI>calling</HI> to <HI>judge</HI> betwixt the <HI>Parliament</HI> and the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> then they mu&s;t <HI>&s;ing obedience</HI> and &s;ubmi&s;&s;ion to the Parliament, <HI>without their under&s;tanding.</HI> But the Con&s;equent is fal&s;e; <HI>Ergo,</HI> And &s;o your Independents &s;hall neither obey Parliament nor A&s;&s;embly. And the Parliament would doe well to note this.</P>
<P N="5">5. I &s;ay more, that &s;ometimes <HI>Subjects</HI> are bound to obey their <HI>Rulers,</HI> when they know not di&s;tinctly the equity of the Command: for, put the ca&s;e a Prince undertake a Warre again&s;t his nei<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters">bour-Prince, every Cobler knoweth not the true cau&s;e of the Warre, or <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> it be ju&s;t, or not; for he
<PB N="44" REF="28"><GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="45" REF="28"><GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="46" REF="29">cannot penetrate into his Princes &s;ecret Coun&s;ells, and yet if the Prince lay A&s;&s;izes upon the people, or pre&s;&s;e Souldiers, they mu&s;t, in all this, <HI>obey,</HI> howbeit they know not the &s;ecrets of his Coun&s;els, yea, howbeit they &s;u&s;pect the Warre to be unju&s;t, they mu&s;t obey; for it is not expedient, that every In|dependent Cobler be admitted into the Coun&s;ell of State; or if that be not granted, that pre&s;ently he re&s;i&s;t his Prince, and rai&s;e a Rebellion in the Kingdome.</P>
<P N="6">6. I pray this man to tell me, whether in <HI>New England</HI> among&s;t the Inde|pendents, every man be not bound to obey what is judged in their A&s;&s;emblies, however he be of a contrary judgement?</P>
<P N="7">7. And whether it be Morally po&s;&s;ible, that every man be of the &s;ame judg|ment, in things that are re&s;olved, or to be re&s;olved in all Civill or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies? And if not, what can be the force of this Argument?</P>
<P>What here he addeth, <HI>The glory of a Synod lyes not &s;o much in the force of their Conclu&s;ions, as of their premi&s;es,</HI> is impertinent; for the force of the pre|mi&s;es and conclu&s;ions are not to be oppo&s;ed one to the other, but to be com|po&s;ed one to another; for the conclu&s;ion followeth nece&s;&s;arily of its premi&s;&s;es: Things are &s;ufficiently di&s;cu&s;&s;ed in the A&s;&s;embly, and their Conclu&s;ions evi|dently enough inferred out of their premi&s;&s;es: but this is an incurable &s;ickne&s;&s;e in the&s;e men, that they never thinke any Conclu&s;ion well inferred, unle&s;&s;e it be for them&s;elves.</P>
<P><HI>Obj.</HI> 22. He telleth us afterwards his judgement, that the conclu&s;ions of the A&s;&s;embly &s;hould not be <HI>&s;wallowed, without shewing, &amp;c.</HI> which the Parlia|ment and A&s;&s;embly will both grant him.</P>
<P><HI>Obj.</HI> 23. <HI>M.</HI> S. In his Sect. 12. he bringeth in quality of an Argument, as it &s;eemeth, an An&s;wer unto one of mine, taken <HI>ab exemplo,</HI> or a <HI>&s;imili,</HI> which I have an&s;wered, and afterwards, Sect. 16. he hath an Argument, the &s;umme whereof is this.</P>
<P><HI>Obj.</HI> 24. Chri&s;t hath not dive&s;ted him&s;elfe, nor made a delegation of &s;uch a directive power in matters of Religion, as <HI>A.</HI> S. would &s;eque&s;ter for the ho|nour of the Presbyterie: <HI>Ergo</HI> he will not acknowledge it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;vv.</HI> 1. I deny the <HI>Con&s;equence:</HI> for to acknowledge &s;uch a Mini|&s;teriall power, as we grant unto the Mini&s;ters of the A&s;&s;embly, or our Pre&s;|byteries, it is not needfull, that Chri&s;t dive&s;t him&s;elfe of it, or make a delega|tion, but a donation of it; for Chri&s;t was never ve&s;ted with &s;uch a Mini&s;teri|all and &s;ubordinate power, for he is Lord and &s;upreame Judge in the Church, and therefore could never dive&s;t him&s;elfe of it. 2. If he meane the &s;upreame power proper to Chri&s;t, we neither de&s;ire him to beleeve, nor beleeve we, that Chri&s;t hath dive&s;ted, or could dive&s;t him&s;elfe of it, to give it to the Church, for he kept to him&s;elfe, his owne &s;upreame or Royall Power; but gave unto his Mini&s;ters &s;ubalterne, and Mini&s;teriall power, which dero|gateth no waies from his Royall power, &s;ince this is &s;ubordinate unto that.
<PB N="47" REF="29">3. However he takes it, this Argument is captious, and is nothing el&s;e but a plain <HI>petitio principii,</HI> and proving the &s;ame thing by the &s;ame, or a Conclu&s;ion by a Premi&s;&s;e, as uncertaine as it &s;elfe.</P>
<P>After this petty Argument he maketh his Te&s;tament, re&s;olving him&s;elfe to dye a Martyr, among&s;t good men, whom he hath mo&s;t highly offended, and who profe&s;&s;e, that they compell no man to profe&s;&s;e any truth, much le&s;&s;e un|truth, again&s;t the light of their Con&s;cience; how ridiculous a Martyr is this? They profe&s;&s;e that they may undergoe a voluntary exile, for feare of per&s;ecu|tion: if you, &s;ir, feare any &s;uch thing, you may be gone, according to the Prin|ciples of your owne Divinity. And then he telleth us, that he will allow any <HI>directive power</HI> of man, &s;o it be <HI>not compul&s;ory unto men by any externall violence, whether directly or indirectly, to &s;ub&s;cribe again&s;t their judgements and con&s;ciences to it.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.</HI> S. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. Our Presbyteries attribute not to them&s;elves any directive power, that is <HI>compul&s;ory</HI> unto men by <HI>externall violence,</HI> to &s;ub&s;cribe again&s;t their judgements. 2. But if a few men differ in their judgements from all the re&s;t of the Church, or will needs bring in new Religions, or novelties, a|gain&s;t the common Tenets of the Church: then indeed they will ca&s;t them out of the Church, or excommunicate them according to their demerits, neither is it equitable that they abide in a Church, or enjoy a Church con&s;ociation, who will not &s;ubmit unto her Iudgement and Di&s;cipline. Neither will his Quin|que Eccle&s;ian Mini&s;ters admit unto, or receive any man into their Church, who differs in judgement from them, or who will not &s;ubmit unto their judgement: But howbeit the Church compell you not to &s;ub&s;cribe; yet the Civill Magi&s;trate, after &s;ufficient conviction, may compell you to &s;ub&s;cribe, or to be gone; for after &s;ufficient conviction, Morally, it is, and &s;hould be &s;uppo&s;ed, that yee know the Truth, or &s;hould know it; or if yee know it not, that nothing can have hin|dred you, but your owne pertinaciou&s;ne&s;&s;e, which cannot excu&s;e, but rather now accu&s;es, and aggravates your &s;inne, &s;ince one &s;inne, formally, and <HI>per &s;e,</HI> cannot excu&s;e another; Neither have our Churches ever gone further, as may appeare by our Confe&s;&s;ions of Faith, and Covenants of the Churches of Scotland, France, the Netherlands, Geneva, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>M.</HI> S. hath &s;ome more poore Rea&s;ons in his 2. Chap. about the <HI>executive power</HI> of the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> in <HI>matters</HI> of <HI>Religion;</HI> Here he imployeth neare upon foure pages in <HI>quarto,</HI> in a very &s;mall Print, about things that are nothing at all to the purpo&s;e. 1. In threatning the Parliament with Gods mo&s;t heavy judgements, in ca&s;e they meddle them&s;elves with any executive, or coercive power, again&s;t his new canonized <HI>Independent Saints;</HI> He &s;uppo|&s;eth them 1. to be <HI>Saints.</HI> 2. <HI>Tho&s;e little ones,</HI> Matth. 18.6. He telleth them, is were better a <HI>Mil&s;tone vvere hanged about their necke,</HI> then <HI>to meddle vvith one of the&s;e little ones;</HI> and that becau&s;e the Holy Gho&s;t prophe&s;ieth of <HI>the putting dovvn of all rule, and all authority, and povver by Chri&s;t; for he mu&s;t reign
<PB N="48" REF="30">till he hath put all his enemies under his feet,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 15.24, 25. this argu|mentation will hold, if ye &s;uppo&s;e the <HI>Independents</HI> to be Chri&s;ts <HI>little Saints,</HI> and the <HI>King</HI> and <HI>Parliament</HI> to be <HI>his Enemies,</HI> in ca&s;e they meddle with them, in hindring them to &s;et up their Sect: but to the contrary. Gods Saints, as them&s;elves, in ca&s;e they &s;uffer not Presbyterians, or any o|thers, no more then the <HI>Independents</HI> doe in <HI>New England:</HI> &s;o the <HI>Indepen|dents</HI> &s;hall reigne over us all. 2. In gue&s;&s;ing what I meane by the word <HI>Church,</HI> whether a <HI>Church</HI> in <HI>folio,</HI> or in <HI>decimo &s;exto?</HI> I have fully expounded it, howbeit not in &s;o cho&s;en new Divinity termes, in <HI>folio,</HI> and <HI>decimo &s;exto.</HI> So I come to the re&s;t of his Rea&s;ons.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VIII.</HI> Wherein are an&s;wered <HI>M. S.</HI> his Objections <HI>25, 26, 27.</HI></HEAD>
<P><HI>Ob.</HI> 25. <HI>M.S.</HI> VVHen Parties pretend to be offended with the Church or the Church judge any thing ami&s;&s;e, the Civill Magi|&s;trate may command the Church to re-examine its judgement, &amp;c. What rea&s;on then hath he to be &s;o <HI>invective</HI> again&s;t the <HI>Apologi&s;ts,</HI> p. 49. &amp; 50. for holding, that <HI>Kings,</HI> or <HI>Civill Magi&s;trates</HI> are above the <HI>Church?</HI></P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>A.S. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. The que&s;tion is not, whether the <HI>King</HI> and the <HI>Civill Ma|gi&s;trate</HI> be above the <HI>Church,</HI> or not. VVe grant, that the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> is above the <HI>Church,</HI> as having a &s;upreame, Politicall, or Civill power, Imperi|all, Regall, Ari&s;tocraticall, or Democraticall, yea altogether independent up|on all the Powers of this World, and only dependent upon God, according to the Lawes of the State wherein he ruleth; yet not Spirituall, Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call, or Intrin&s;ecall to the Church, but Secular and Extrin&s;ecall. In his Office he is not &s;ubordinate or Vicegerent unto Chri&s;t, as Chri&s;t, but as God; not in his Royall or <HI>Divine office</HI> whereby he ruleth his <HI>Church;</HI> but in his <HI>Divine Nature</HI> or Power whereby he ruleth the <HI>World:</HI> not in his <HI>particular Providence</HI> about his <HI>Saints,</HI> but in his <HI>generall</HI> about <HI>all men</HI> and <HI>States:</HI> not according to the Covenant of <HI>Grace,</HI> if he be con&s;idered only as a Magi&s;trate; for then, only they, who are in this Covenant, &s;hould be Magi&s;trates; but of <HI>Na|ture;</HI> for if <HI>Adam</HI> had continued in the &s;tate of <HI>innocencie,</HI> we &s;hould have had <HI>Magi&s;trates</HI> without any <HI>Mediator,</HI> or <HI>Covenant of Grace. A. S.</HI> will ea&s;ily grant you, that the Civill Magi&s;trate is above the Church; only he denies, that he is above the Church by any <HI>&s;pirituall</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power,</HI> as <HI>Inde|pendents</HI> hold, but by his <HI>Civill</HI> and &s;ecular Authority, which is not &s;ubordi|nate to Chri&s;t, as Mediator, as King, or Head of his Church: His power over the Church is not <HI>intrin&s;ecall,</HI> as ye hold, but <HI>extrin&s;ecall,</HI> as we confe&s;&s;e.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. It is al&s;o fal&s;e, that I inveigh again&s;t the <HI>Apologi&s;ts,</HI> p. 49. 50. unle&s;&s;e Rea&s;ons be Invectives. I pray the Reader to look the place, to the end he may &s;ee how little Con&s;cience the&s;e men make of untruths: and if there be any Invectives there, I am ready to &s;uffer.</ITEM>
<PB N="49" REF="30">
<ITEM>3. This Argument being put in forme, will be thus:
<LIST>
<ITEM>They who may <HI>command</HI> the <HI>Church,</HI> are above the <HI>Church:</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>The <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> may <HI>command</HI> the <HI>Church;</HI> Ergo,</ITEM>
<ITEM>The <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> is <HI>above</HI> the <HI>Church.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST></ITEM>
</LIST>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> If the words, <HI>command,</HI> and to be <HI>above,</HI> be taken for to com|mand, and to be above <HI>Externally</HI> and <HI>Politically, I</HI> grant you all the Argu|ment, viz. That the Civill Magi&s;trate is above the Church extrin&s;ecally and Politically: But if ye take both the words, viz. <HI>command,</HI> for an an internall and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall command,</HI> that is within the Church; and the word <HI>above,</HI> for <HI>above Internally</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tically</HI> in a <HI>Church-way:</HI> I deny your <HI>Minor.</HI> If ye take the one word one way, and the other another way, I deny your fir&s;t Propo&s;ition.</P>
<P><HI>M.S. Ob.</HI> 26. p. 44. &sect;. 7. If the Civill Magi&s;trate hath power to <HI>command the Church to revi&s;e her judgement, when &s;he judgeth any thing ami&s;&s;e,</HI> &s;urely he hath power to examine and judge of her proceedings, and con&s;equently, hath a <HI>Directive power in matters of Religion.</HI> But the fir&s;t is granted by <HI>A.S.</HI> his conce&s;&s;ion, <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;o mu&s;t the &s;econd.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. I an&s;wer to your Propo&s;ition, that in the &s;ame way the Civill Magi&s;trate hath power to judge, or a Directive power in matters of Religi|on, he hath power to command. Now his power to command, (as I have &s;aid, is only Politicall, Civill, and Extrin&s;ecall; <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;uch al&s;o mu&s;t be his power to judge, or Directive power in matters of Religion, viz. Civill, Politicall, and Extrin&s;ecall to the Church, how&s;oever Intrin&s;ecall to the State: for as he hath a Civill, Royall, Imperiall, or Ari&s;tocraticall power to <HI>command,</HI> &s;o hath he a Civill, Royall, Imperiall, or Ari&s;tocraticall power, &amp;c. to <HI>judge,</HI> and to direct him in his Commands, unle&s;&s;e he command without judgement: But I deny, that this concludeth, that he hath any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall or Spirituall power that is Intrin&s;ecall to the Church, or Church-Officers, who governe the Church. 2. This Argument concludeth not an Executive power, which is the Title of the Chapter, and that which he intendeth to prove. This is like to <HI>Montagnes</HI> Di&s;cour&s;es, who &s;undry times hath one thing in the Title, and an|other in the Chapter.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Obj.</HI> 27. p. 44. <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 7. &sect;. 3. being put in forme, will be thus:</P>
<P>They, who may determine, and judge ami&s;&s;e, &s;hould not compell, or make the people, under their Government, to &s;weare obedience or &s;ubjection unto their Orders, which yet, by your owne confe&s;&s;ion, they doe:</P>
<P>But your <HI>Presbyteriall A&s;&s;embly</HI> may determine and judge ami&s;&s;e, <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. The Propo&s;ition is fal&s;e. 2. Or if it be true, I &s;ub&s;ume, But the Civill Magi&s;trate, both in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, and State matters, may judge ami&s;&s;e; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the Civill Magi&s;trate &s;hould not compell the people under his
<PB N="50" REF="31">obedience unto his Order; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the <HI>Parliament</HI> &s;hould not compell, or make any man to &s;weare the <HI>Covenant; Ergo,</HI> The <HI>Independents</HI> &s;hould not have taken the <HI>Covenant,</HI> becau&s;e that the <HI>Parliament</HI> might determine and judge ami&s;&s;e. 3. By this rea&s;on, a man mu&s;t be tolerated in rejecting all Con|fe&s;&s;ions or Faith, becau&s;e they, who contrive them, may erre. 4. In <HI>New-England,</HI> &s;ince they may erre, they can compell no man to your Religion, but mu&s;t tolerate them, which ye will never grant. 5. I deny the <HI>A&s;&s;umption,</HI> 1. For our Churches compell not the people to &s;weare obedience or &s;ubjecti|on unto their Order; for, Compul&s;ion is <HI>a principio externo, contra inclinati|onem agentis;</HI> it proceedeth from an Externall principle, again&s;t the Naturall inclination of the Agent, viz. that is compelled to produce the action, and &s;o is exerci&s;ed only again&s;t the Body, over which the Church taketh no autho|rity, but the Civill Magi&s;trate alone. 2. Neither &s;aid I, to my knowledge, any &s;uch thing. 3. Neither cite you the place. 4. Only I remember, that in my <HI>Ob&s;ervations</HI> and <HI>Annotations</HI> upon the <HI>Apologie,</HI> p. 39. &sect;. 4 I &s;aid, That <HI>the combined Elder&s;hip, having an Authoritative power, all men, and Churches thereof, are bound by Law and Covenant to &s;ubmit them&s;elves thereunto,</HI> viz. in a Spirituall manner, &s;ince the power is Spirituall. Never a word here of <HI>compul&s;ion</HI> or violence. Our Churches neither compell mens bodies, nor have they any Pri&s;ons, or any pecuniary mulcts: but if any man will trouble the Church, and be di&s;obedient, it is the duty of the Chri&s;tian Civill Magi&s;trate to u&s;e his power, to hinder &s;uch a di&s;order. If we have not a Chri&s;tian, and an Orthodox Magi&s;trate in &s;ome places, as in <HI>France,</HI> and in &s;ome parts of <HI>Ger|many;</HI> or if the Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate will not doe his duty, he who will not &s;ubmit unto our Church-Government, is ca&s;t out, and puni&s;hed Spiritually, by &s;imple Cen&s;ure, Su&s;pen&s;ion, or Excommunication, according to the quality of his &s;in. 5. Learne al&s;o, I pray you, <HI>M.S.</HI> that it is not fallibility, but actuall failing, or ignorance, that may excu&s;e him, who is &s;ubject unto any Govern|ment or Authority, from obedience: Nor yet all failing in judgement or error, but only that which is antecedent to all the acts of our Will, which mo|rally we cannot &s;hun, and is invincible. 6. Neither is it evermore expedient, that Subjects know certainly, whether their Governours judge, or doe right, in what they doe; for Subjects, in &s;ome ca&s;es, mu&s;t obey, in virtue of a pro|bable knowledge, or conjecture, that their Governours command ju&s;tly; and e&s;pecially, when they are not compelled to be Actors in that, which they be|lieve to be unlawfull for them to doe. For I put the ca&s;e, that the <HI>King</HI> and <HI>Parliament</HI> take a re&s;olution to make War again&s;t any Foraigne Prince, and pre&s;&s;e &s;ome men to &s;erve in &s;uch a War, It is not for every pre&s;&s;ed man to call the <HI>King</HI> and <HI>Parliament</HI> to an account, about the equity of the War, neither are they bound to di&s;cover to every Souldier all the &s;ecrets and particulari|ties of State thereupon.</P>
<P><HI>M.S. Ob.</HI> 28. Why are you not &s;atisfied with that &s;ubjection to your Pre&s;|byterial
<PB N="51" REF="31">Deci&s;ions, that pleadeth no exemption, but only in ca&s;e of non-&s;ati&s;|faction about the lawfulne&s;&s;e or truth of them?</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;.</HI> 1. We are content with it. 2. And in ca&s;e of non-&s;atisfaction, our Churches give them &s;ufficient &s;atisfaction. 3. But if they will not be &s;atisfied, when many thou&s;ands are &s;atisfied, we maintaine, that it is not equitable, that when 20000. or 30000. are &s;atisfied, two, or three, under pretext of non-&s;ati&s;faction, or twenty, or thirty pertinacious fellowes &s;hould have liberty to trouble all the Churches of God in the World. 4. We &s;ay moreover, that the Church, in di&s;puting and conferring with them, and afterward in judging that &s;he hath given them &s;ufficient &s;atisfaction, hath given them &s;ufficient &s;atis|faction morally; and that wi&s;e men &s;hould judge it &s;ufficient, <HI>in foro Externo;</HI> and thereupon, that they are to be condemned by the Church <HI>in foro Externo;</HI> for there is no other way to proceed to &s;entence, either <HI>in foro Civili,</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tico.</HI> 5. If this will not &s;atisfie them, yet if they will be quiet, and not trouble the Church of God with their Conventicles, we can in Chri&s;tian charity tolerate them in their weakne&s;&s;e, yea in their malice (if there be any) till God impart unto them more grace. But this &s;erveth nothing for <HI>Indepen|dents,</HI> who are come over the Sea to beg a quarrell of us, and to erect Chur|ches in de&s;pite of the Civill Magi&s;trate, again&s;t all Lawes, yea again&s;t their own Tenets, if they write, as they believe; for they pretend, that Churches cannot be erected without the Civill Magi&s;trates con&s;ent. 6. If all this con|tent them not, and their Con&s;cience will not permit them to doe otherwi&s;e, the Ports are free for them, they may be gone, and live in all liberty of Con|&s;cience in <HI>New England,</HI> and trouble no more the Country here, then the Country &s;hall trouble them there. 7. Or if this will not content them, where|fore will they have more liberty here, then they will grant us in <HI>New-England?</HI></P>
<P><HI>M.S. Ob.</HI> 29. If Parties may have cau&s;e to be offended with the Church, then have they power to judge of their actions, as well as they of theirs: But the fir&s;t is true; <HI>Ergo,</HI> the &s;econd al&s;o.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> I di&s;tingui&s;h the Con&s;equent of the Propo&s;ition; <HI>They may judge by a publick Judgement:</HI> It is fal&s;e; for every particular or private man hath not a publike power to <HI>judge,</HI> nor con&s;equently, a Publike judgement: they may judge by a private power, (which properly is not <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>pote&s;tas, authoritas,</HI> or Authoritative power) or judgement, but a judgement of Di&s;cretion: &s;o it is true: but &s;uch a Judgement is not &s;ufficient to exempt him from obedience, I meane not an active, but a pa&s;&s;ive, or rather a permi&s;&s;ive obedience; for how&s;oever his erronious judgement may excu&s;e and di&s;pence him from an act, wherein he is Actor again&s;t his Con&s;cience; yet can it not excu&s;e him from &s;uffering the judgement of the Church: for, if he will not doe what they will according to Gods Word, they may doe, and he mu&s;t &s;uffer, and permit them to doe what he willeth not, and what they will according to Gods Word, whereof he hath no Publike power to judge: he mu&s;t no way oppo&s;e
<PB N="52" REF="32"><HI>activ&egrave;</HI> the publike Judgement and Authority of the Church, &s;ince he hath no publike power; he mu&s;t not &s;et up a new Church, but deal with the Church, according to his vocation; and if he cannot prevail in confer|ring with the Church, he may appeal from a Pari&s;h Presbytery to a Cla&s;&s;e; if there he be likewi&s;e oppre&s;&s;ed, he may appeal to a Provinciall Synod; if there again he be wronged by their Judgement, he may appeal unto a Nationall Synod; if there he be oppre&s;&s;ed (which probably will not ordinarily fall out in all the&s;e Judicatories, rather then in fir&s;t and la&s;t in&s;tance in an Independent Church, compounded peradventure of &s;even or eight idle Fellows) or pretend to be offended, he mu&s;t &s;it down pa|tiently; And if he have any &s;cruple of Con&s;cience, he may con&s;ult for|raign Divines; and if tho&s;e &s;atisfie him not in this &s;ingularity of his opinion, I then propound my que&s;tion; Whether it be more equitable, That all the Churches of the World &s;ubmit to this particular mans opinion, or he to theirs?</P>
<P>Object. <HI>But what if they erre all, and he be right?</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> When God hath not given you any ordinary remedy, you mu&s;t have patience; there mu&s;t be Offences, yea Here&s;ies; But woe unto him that is the Cau&s;e. There was no other way in the Old, or in the New Te&s;tament; there is no other in Civill Judicatories; there can be no other found in this world. And to end this Argument, I ask you, What if a man be oppre&s;&s;ed in one of your Churches, (as it is po&s;&s;ible a man may be, as well as in one of ours, unle&s;&s;e ye have <HI>the power of Piety,</HI> in a more Independent degree, yea, be|yond all <HI>fle&s;h and blood in any juncture of time to come</HI>) and afterward he complains to Neighbour Churches, and they oppre&s;&s;e him by their Judge|ments; What other remedy can he have but patience, and to appeal to the Judge of quick and dead, or el&s;e acquie&s;ce to the &s;entence, or at lea&s;t &s;uffer it? For a man cannot &s;in in meer &s;ufferance; for actuall &s;in materially is ever more an action of the will, or a voluntary omi&s;&s;ion of &s;ome action.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 30. <HI>p.</HI> 46. <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 2. What power is Intrin&s;ecall to Religion, it is Intrin&s;ecall to the Church: But the Civill Magi&s;trates Power is Intrin&s;ecall to Religion; for <HI>A. S.</HI> &s;ayeth, That the <HI>Parliament pretends no Directive power in matters of Religion, but an Executive power onely, viz.</HI> In matters of Religion. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The Civill Magi&s;trates power is Intrin&s;ecall to the Church.</P>
<P><HI>A. S. An&s;w.</HI> What ever may be &s;aid of the Propo&s;ition, I deny the A&s;|&s;umption; and to the confirmation thereof, I an&s;wer, 1. That, when I &s;ay the Civill Magi&s;trate hath power <HI>in</HI> Religion, the word <HI>(in)</HI> &s;ignifies <HI>about;</HI> for Religion &s;ignifieth the object of the Civill Magi&s;trate; and &s;o we &s;peak or|dinarily, as when we &s;ay, A rich mans heart is in his Money and Riches; &s;o <HI>in</HI> here &s;ignifieth not an Intrin&s;ecall, but an Extrin&s;ecall Denomination; as when I &s;ay, The Sun is &s;een, the Attribute in this Affirmative Propo&s;ition is
<PB N="53" REF="32">&s;aid to be in the Subject, not by any Intrin&s;ecall Inherence, or Denomination, but by an Extrin&s;ecall Adherence, Attribution, or Denomination: This little Childi&s;h Sophi&s;tication, is more worthy of &s;ome young &s;matterer in Logick then of a Divine, or any Con&s;cientious man: It is not po&s;&s;ible, that <HI>M. S.</HI> could be ignorant of this; and therefore in this Di&s;pute, if he have any <HI>power of Piety,</HI> I de&s;ire more Con&s;cience and Sincerity in him: I may al&s;o &s;ay, That the Civill Magi&s;trate hath an Extrin&s;ecall power in the Church, if the word <HI>(in)</HI> there &s;ignifie a bare Attribution, or Extrin&s;ecall Denomination, as it is ordinary among&s;t Divines, Philo&s;ophers, and common people; and yet I confe&s;&s;e it is more properly &s;aid <HI>about</HI> Religion, and <HI>about</HI> the Church, as <HI>A|pollonius</HI> ob&s;erveth, and as I have expre&s;&s;ed my &s;elf; but then there &s;hould have been a concurrence of <HI>in's,</HI> which would have made my Expre&s;&s;ion ob|&s;cure; for then I mu&s;t have &s;aid, The Civill Magi&s;trate <HI>about</HI> matters of Re|ligion, hath an Extrin&s;ecall power, as al&s;o about the Church, as this Profe&s;&s;or of Eloquence would have me to &s;peak; which kinde of Expre&s;&s;ion, I beleeve few or none could have under&s;tood. If the Independent cau&s;e depend upon &s;uch ridiculous puntillio's, and be &s;o Independent upon good rea&s;on, I know not of the two which is better, <HI>Dependency</HI> or <HI>Independency.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S. Ob.</HI> 31. <HI>p.</HI> 46. <HI>&s;ect.</HI> 11. The power of Citation is Extrin&s;ecall to the Church.</P>
<P>The power of Citation is Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P>Some Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power is Extrin&s;ecall to the Church.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I di&s;tingui&s;h the word <HI>power</HI> of Citation; for it is either <HI>Eccle&s;ia|&s;ticall,</HI> which is proper unto the Church, <HI>viz.</HI> In Church Officers gathered together in an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;embly;</HI> And this is both <HI>in,</HI> and <HI>about</HI> the Church or <HI>Civill,</HI> which is proper to the Chri&s;tian, and in &s;ome way to a non-Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate, where by his Civill power he maintaineth the Church; and this is out of the Church, in the Magi&s;trate, and yet <HI>about</HI> the Church, which is its object: And &s;o I an&s;wer to this &s;illy Argument, That it is cap|tious and grounded on an Equivocation; for it taketh the power of Citation in one &s;ignification in the Major, <HI>viz.</HI> For a Politicall power of Citation; and in an other in the Minor, <HI>viz.</HI> For an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power of Citation. 2. Or if it be taken in both for an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, then the Major is fal&s;e; for Chri&s;t gave it to the Church, to which it is Intrin&s;ecall, and not to the Civill Magi&s;trate. 3. Or if it be taken in both for a Civill power, then the Minor is fal&s;e; for the Civill power of Citation is not in the <HI>Church,</HI> but in the Magi&s;trate; neither ever gave <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> it (as <HI>Mediator</HI>) either to the <HI>Church,</HI> or to the Civill Magi&s;trate; but God by Chri&s;t (as God) gave it onely to the Civill Magi&s;trate: And the Peece, whereof the Pre&s;&s;e, as <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;ayeth, hath been lately delivered, &s;ayeth no other thing then I &s;ay, if <HI>M. S.</HI> his <HI>Diana</HI> of <HI>Ephe&s;us</HI> can permit him to under&s;tand it, or he do not willingly di&s;&s;emble his under&s;tanding of it.</P>
<PB N="54" REF="33">
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> If a Cla&s;&s;is &s;hall cite or excommunicate a Member of a <HI>Church,</HI> again&s;t the judgement and con&s;ent of the Elders of that <HI>Church,</HI> let all the World judge, whether that be not an Act of Externall power without the <HI>Church.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This Argument is ridiculous. 1. For it proveth not that which is in que&s;tion, <HI>viz.</HI> That the Civill Magi&s;trate hath an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall</HI> or <HI>Intrin|&s;ecall power</HI> in the <HI>Church.</HI> 2. Onely it proveth, that the <HI>Church</HI> hath an <HI>Authority,</HI> that in &s;ome re&s;pect may be called <HI>Extrin&s;ecall.</HI> 3. But to take away this Equivocation, and many others, and to explain more fully this que&s;tion, note again, 1. That the <HI>Church</HI> may be con&s;idered, either according to its <HI>Reall</HI> and <HI>Naturall,</HI> or according to its <HI>Morall</HI> being. 2. That the <HI>Church</HI> according to its <HI>Morall</HI> being (I &s;peak of the <HI>Repre&s;entative</HI>) is either <HI>Particular</HI> of one Pari&s;h or Congregation, or more <HI>Generall,</HI> as a <HI>Cla&s;&s;icall</HI> or <HI>Synodall A&s;&s;embly.</HI> 3. Note, that the <HI>particular Church,</HI> may be con&s;ide|red either <HI>Ab&s;olutely,</HI> and in it &s;elf alone, without any reference to a Cla&s;&s;e or a Synod, whereof it is a part; or <HI>Relatively</HI> with a reference to the more <HI>Generall Church, viz.</HI> a <HI>Cla&s;&s;is</HI> or <HI>Synod,</HI> whereof it is a part, or in quality, and under the notion of a part, in &s;o far forth, as by &s;ome formall or virtuall A&s;&s;ent, it hath once Covenanted to be a part of &s;uch a <HI>Cla&s;&s;is</HI> or <HI>Synod,</HI> and Stipulated to &s;end its <HI>Commi&s;&s;ioners</HI> to &s;uch Cla&s;&s;icall or Synodall Meetings. 1. If then we con&s;ider <HI>Citation</HI> or <HI>Excommunication</HI> with reference to the <HI>Church,</HI> either more <HI>Generall</HI> or <HI>Particular,</HI> according to its Naturall being, it may be Extrin&s;ecall to them both; for the Act of <HI>Citation</HI> or <HI>Excommuni|cation</HI> is not really produced or pronounced, according to its Naturall being, by the <HI>Church</HI> con&s;idered under the notion of its Reall being, but by one man, as all wi&s;e men will grant. 2. If they be taken morally according to their Morall being, grounded on &s;ome <HI>Covenant,</HI> then the Acts of <HI>Excommunica|tion</HI> and <HI>Citation</HI> are not Extrin&s;ecall to the more <HI>Generall Church,</HI> &s;ince they are exerci&s;ed by Her power and con&s;ent. 3. If they be con&s;idered with re|ference to the <HI>Particular Church,</HI> then if the <HI>Particular Church</HI> be con&s;ider|ed Ab&s;olutely, they may be Extrin&s;ecall unto Her, &s;ince neither <HI>Excommuni|cation</HI> nor <HI>Citation</HI> are exerci&s;ed by Her Ab&s;olutely, at lea&s;t Ordinarily. 4. If we con&s;ider a <HI>Particular Church</HI> in reference to the more <HI>Generall Church, viz.</HI> under the notion of a part of the more <HI>Generall Church;</HI> then we may con&s;ider Her either, 1. According to Her fir&s;t <HI>Con&s;ent</HI> and <HI>Covenant,</HI> Reall or Virtuall, whereby She joyned together in one <HI>Con&s;ociation</HI> with many other <HI>Particular Churches,</HI> to make up together one <HI>Cla&s;&s;e</HI> or <HI>Synod;</HI> the which <HI>Con&s;ent</HI> preceded the Act of <HI>Citation</HI> or <HI>Excommunication;</HI> and whereby the <HI>Cla&s;&s;e</HI> or <HI>Synod</HI> received Power to cite or excommunicate particular Per|&s;ons: Or 2. according to Her <HI>Con&s;ent,</HI> in &s;ending Her <HI>Commi&s;&s;ioners</HI> to the <HI>Cla&s;&s;e</HI> or <HI>Synod:</HI> Or 3. according to Her &s;ub&s;equent or concomitant <HI>Di&s;&s;ent</HI> to the Act of <HI>Excommunication</HI> or <HI>Citation.</HI> 4. If then She be con&s;idered
<PB N="55" REF="33">according to Her fir&s;t <HI>Covenant</HI> and <HI>con&s;ent,</HI> or in the &s;econd, <HI>i. e.</HI> in &s;ending Her <HI>Commi&s;&s;ioners,</HI> the Act of <HI>Citation</HI> and <HI>Excommunication</HI> is voluntary, and Intrin&s;ecall to that <HI>Particular Church,</HI> notwith&s;tanding Her &s;ub&s;equent or concomitant <HI>Di&s;&s;ent;</HI> for that Act of <HI>Citation</HI> and <HI>Excommunication</HI> is done in vertue of &s;uch precedent <HI>Con&s;ents,</HI> which are Her <HI>Deeds,</HI> and very Legall. 5. If the <HI>Particular Church</HI> be con&s;idered according to Her &s;ub&s;equent or concomitant <HI>Di&s;&s;ent,</HI> the&s;e Acts are involuntary, and Extrin&s;ecall to that <HI>Particular Church:</HI> But &s;uch a <HI>Di&s;&s;ent</HI> is not properly and formally an Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall Act, &s;ince it is not ruled by any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Rule of <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> but by private intere&s;t, or pa&s;&s;ion, which mu&s;t ever give place to the Weal of the whole <HI>Church;</HI> for as Naturall bodies may be con&s;idered either Ab&s;olute|ly, or under the notion of a Part, which is for the whole; and in the fir&s;t notion, they have their Particular Inclinations and Motions, whereby they decline what&s;oever is hurtfull unto them, as when the hand flyeth from a blow of a Sword; but under the &s;econd, they are not led by their own par|ticular, but by the generall Inclination and Intere&s;t of the whole, &s;ince parts are not &s;o much for them&s;elves, as for the whole; and &s;o it neglecteth its own particular good or intere&s;t, for the weal or intere&s;t of the whole; as when the hand for fear lea&s;t the head &s;hould be cut off, whereof might en&s;ue the de&s;truction of the whole man, expo&s;eth it &s;elf to the danger in receiving the blow it &s;elf, to &s;ave the whole: So in Politicall or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Con&s;ociations, particular Towns, or Churches, may be carried by their own Intere&s;ts to &s;ome particular Di&s;&s;ent in &s;ome Ca&s;es; but if they move Regularly, &s;ometimes again&s;t their own Intere&s;ts, they mu&s;t Con&s;ent again&s;t them&s;elves, according to the generall Inclination of the whole Con&s;ociated body, or Church Cla&s;&s;i|call, Synodall, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 6. If this Argument hold, it will conclude, 1. Again&s;t that which is done by Plurality of Votes in their particular Congregations; For that which is concluded, is again&s;t the Con&s;ent of the Minor part. 2. A|gain&s;t that which is done in their Synods, by their Me&s;&s;engers, if they con|clude again&s;t, or without the Con&s;ent of the Churches, whereof they are Me&s;&s;engers: And 3. Again&s;t the Parliament, if they conclude any thing a|gain&s;t the particular Con&s;ent of particular Towns; for they Con&s;ent not thereunto; And &s;o what they conclude or do again&s;t them &s;hall not be done by Con&s;ent of the Kingdom; And &s;o this man &s;hall de&s;troy the Parliament, and the pretended Order of Independents, as well as that of Prote&s;tant Pres|byteries.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> telleth us, that &s;o the Cla&s;&s;is is like to the Magi&s;trate, who is a Bi&s;hop without, and about the Church.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. I deny your Simile; for the Magi&s;trates Power and Act, being onely Politicall and Civill, has no Internall reference to <HI>Citation</HI> or <HI>Excom|munication,</HI> in quality of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Acts, as that of the <HI>Church,</HI> and <HI>Church Officers,</HI> which is Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall; and this your Quinqu' Eccle&s;ian
<PB N="56" REF="34">Mini&s;ters acknowledge them&s;elves, when they tell us, that the Civill Power is of another nature then the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall.</P>
<P><HI>Obj.</HI> But if the Civill Magi&s;trate have this Externall coactive power, they mu&s;t all have it, as well Pagans as Chri&s;tians: But &s;o it is not; for <HI>A.S.</HI> will not grant it to Pagans, <HI>Ergo,</HI> none of them have it.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> The A&s;&s;umption is fal&s;e, for I grant it to them all, but not in the &s;ame manner; To a Pagan only <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> but to a true Chri&s;tian <HI>in actu exercito.</HI> I expound it in my Annotations upon the <HI>Apologeticall Narration.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> &s;cratches at this di&s;tinction, 1. as not good; for, &s;aith he, I never heard of any thing belonging to a Per&s;on <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> but that belonged to him, and that <HI>per prius in actu &s;ignato:</HI> He, to whom the principle or power of acting doth not belong, cannot &s;tand ingaged for the exerci&s;e of acting &s;uch a power.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Sir, If you heard it not, others, yea of the be&s;t &s;ort, and able&s;t, both Divines and Philo&s;ophers, may have heard it; for we have learned in the <HI>Category</HI> of <HI>Sub&s;tantia,</HI> that <HI>Sub&s;tantiae primae maxim&egrave; propri&egrave; Sub&s;tantiae dicun|tur:</HI> whereupon they ground this other Maxime, <HI>Prima Sub&s;tantia magis e&s;t Sub&s;tantia quam Secunda:</HI> and they &s;ay, that it is <HI>magis Sub&s;tantia in actu ex|ercito, &s;ed non in &s;ignato; &s;ed contra, &s;ecunda e&s;t magis &s;ub&s;tantia quam Prima in actu &s;ignato;</HI> as all the Philo&s;ophers, who &s;erve them&s;elves with this di&s;tin|ction, in the explication of that propriety of <HI>Sub&s;tance,</HI> declare in that place. 2. It is al&s;o an error in you, to think, that <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> and <HI>exercito,</HI> is no|thing el&s;e but <HI>actu &amp; potentia.</HI> 3. Put the ca&s;e it be &s;o, and that whatever be|longeth to any thing <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> belongeth to it <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> what is that to the purpo&s;e? is not that enough to found a di&s;tinction upon? Wherever there is <HI>prius</HI> and <HI>po&s;terius,</HI> is there not there &s;ome <HI>di&s;tinction,</HI> at lea&s;t <HI>formall,</HI> or <HI>modall,</HI> if not <HI>reall?</HI> 4. Yea, put the ca&s;e, the one part were really included in the other; yet &s;hould there ever be <HI>di&s;tinctio includentis, &amp; inclu&s;i.</HI> 5. And how&s;oever it be, that what belongeth to a per&s;on <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> belongeth to him <HI>in actu &s;ignato;</HI> yet what belongeth to a Thing <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> belong|eth not to it <HI>in actu exercito.</HI> Neither &s;aid I, that whatever belongeth to any thing <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> belongeth not to it al&s;o <HI>in actu &s;ignato.</HI> Where &s;aid I it, I pray you? or if I &s;aid it not, wherefore beg you here a needle&s;&s;e quarrell with me about it?</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>M. S.</HI> de&s;ires to know, wherefore a power about the Church, and for the Church, &s;hould not belong <HI>actually,</HI> and <HI>in effect,</HI> in <HI>actu exercito,</HI> and <HI>jure in re,</HI> as well to a Magi&s;trate not yet truly Chri&s;tian, as to him that is &s;uch, i. e as well to a Pagan, as a Chri&s;tian.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> 1. Becau&s;e being not yet a Chri&s;tian, he is not a member of the Chri&s;tian Church. 2. Becau&s;e a Pagan, <HI>qua talis,</HI> knoweth not the Princi|ples of Chri&s;tian Religion, and con&s;equently wants the Directive power, without the which he can never well, or ju&s;tly u&s;e the Imperative or Exe|cutive
<PB N="57" REF="34">power. 3. Becau&s;e without the knowledge of our Religion, he can nei|ther direct, nor act any thing about the Church, or for the Church, but by conjecture, or gue&s;&s;ing at it. 4. Becau&s;e God never ordained any &s;uch Externall power for Pagans about the Church. 5. To end my an&s;wer to this Argu|ment: Where learned <HI>M. S.</HI> to de&s;ire him that denieth any thing, to prove his negation? <HI>Nonne Affirmantis e&s;t probare?</HI> The Scripture conteineth not formall rules or te&s;timonies of meere <HI>Negations,</HI> or of things that are not, but of <HI>Affirmations,</HI> and things that are. Now <HI>M.S.</HI> that affirmeth a thing to be, might more ea&s;ily have found authorities for it in Scripture, (if any &s;uch had been) then we, for things that are not: It is enough for me to &s;ay, that the Scripture, that conteineth all things needfull to &s;alvation, conteineth no Extrin&s;ecall power, <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> for Civill Magi&s;trates, that are not Chri|&s;tians.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> But hath not then an Heathen, or Heterodox Magi&s;trate power to doe good to the Church?</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;.</HI> 1. The Heathen Magi&s;trate hath a Naturall, but not a Morall publique power, or <GAP DESC="foreign"> to doe good to the Church. 2. Or if he hath it, he hath it not <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> as I have already proved. 3. Or if he hath it &s;o, he hath it not to doe good to the Church, in quality of a Church; for nei|ther can he know, or love the Church, in quality of a Church, but of men, or members of the State: for the Church, in quality of a Church, is no wayes the object of his Knowledge, or Will. He may doe it, as an A&s;&s;e, that carrieth the corne to the Mill; or as <HI>Caiaphas,</HI> who judged, that one man mu&s;t dye for the People; but knew not what he &s;aid. He cannot doe it by any power Intrin&s;ecall to the Church, as <HI>M.S.</HI> pretends: And howbeit I &s;hould grant unto a Iew, or a Pagan, a Civill power to doe good to the Church, both <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> and <HI>exercito:</HI> yet from thence cannot be concluded an Intrin|&s;ecall or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power belonging to a Iew, a Pagan, or to an Antichri|&s;tian to rule the Church Internally.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> p. 48. &sect;. 13. of this Chapter, dur&s;t not an&s;wer <HI>A.S.</HI> what he mea|neth by the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> upon whom he would &s;eem to be&s;tow &s;uch a power; but in &s;tead of An&s;wer, racketeth it back to him with jeering and bab|ling: But I an&s;wer him, 1. that <HI>Quae&s;tio Quae&s;tionem non &s;olvit,</HI> one Que&s;tion &s;atisfieth not another. 2. I an&s;wer, that the <HI>Magi&s;trate,</HI> who I beleeve &s;hould have &s;uch a power <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> mu&s;t be &s;uch, as is not a profe&s;&s;ed Enemy to the true Religion, at lea&s;t, in quality of a <HI>Magi&s;trate,</HI> or in his Lawes.</P>
<P>And &s;o it is fal&s;e, that <HI>M.S.</HI> &s;aith of the <HI>King;</HI> for, in quality of <HI>King,</HI> he hath profe&s;&s;ed <HI>Presbyterian Di&s;cipline</HI> in <HI>Scotland,</HI> in as much as he confirmed it by his Authority: &s;o hath he done in <HI>England,</HI> in favour of the <HI>French, Dutch, Italian,</HI> and <HI>Spani&s;h</HI> Churches: &s;o did King <HI>James,</HI> by his Divines, approve the <HI>Presbyterian Di&s;cipline,</HI> at the Synod of <HI>Dort.</HI> So <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;ees
<PB N="58" REF="35">how much he hath deceived him&s;elfe, in looking for 20 Di&s;tinctions of me, to an&s;wer him to this Que&s;tion. We an&s;wer him <HI>candid&egrave;,</HI> in all &s;implicity, and feare not to declare to the World what we hold, as the Sectaries doe.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> p. 49. &sect;. 15. Was it not lawfull for them, i. e. <HI>unchri&s;tian Kings,</HI> to in|terpo&s;e with their Authority, that the Churches of Chri&s;t in their Dominati|ons, <HI>might lead a quiet and peaceable life, in all Godline&s;&s;e and hone&s;tie?</HI> If not, then was that exhortation, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.2. to be laid up in Lavender for &s;ome hundreds of yeers, after it was given; or el&s;e the benefit and ble&s;&s;ing, the obtaining whereof by prayer, is made the ground of the exhortation, mu&s;t have been made over in the intentions of tho&s;e that had &s;o prayed, unto their po&s;terities after many generations.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. This Argument proveth not, that any Magi&s;trate, either Chri&s;ti|an, or other, hath any Intrin&s;ecall power in the Church, either Directive or Executive. 2. It proveth not, that an unchri&s;tian Magi&s;trate hath any power <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> in the Church. 3. As for that Text, 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.2. the &s;en&s;e of the Text is, that we &s;hould pray for the conver&s;ion of Kings to the Go&s;pel: which appeareth evidently by the Apo&s;tles rea&s;on, v. 3. &amp; 4. <HI>For</HI> (&s;aith he) <HI>this is good and acceptable in the &s;ight of God, v.</HI> 4. <HI>who will have all men &s;aved, and come unto the knowledge of the truth.</HI> And another rea&s;on, <HI>v.</HI> 6. <HI>For Chri&s;t gave him&s;elfe for all men.</HI> And another, <HI>v.</HI> 7. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle <HI>is a Preacher of the Go&s;pel</HI> to all men. Now the&s;e words, <HI>That we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all Godline&s;&s;e and Piety,</HI> expre&s;&s;e <HI>finem intentum, &s;ed non eventum;</HI> not the Event, but the End intended by the Chri&s;tians who prayed; for they obteined not, in tho&s;e times, a quiet or a peaceable life, under the Heathen Kings. 2. Neither prayed they here, that any <HI>Nero</HI> &s;hould have had the Government of the Church in his hand; for they obeyed him not, neither in Doctrine, nor in Di&s;cipline.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> p. 50. &sect;. 17. doth nothing, but repeat what he hath &s;aid, viz. <HI>That the Civill Magi&s;trate, in taking away Super&s;tition and Here&s;ie, had need of &s;ome other &s;ecurity, then the</HI> Synod <HI>can give him.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> The Civill Magi&s;trate, as a Chri&s;tian man, mu&s;t learne Gods will, by all the meanes that God hath appointed him, viz. 1. By reading of Scriptures; 2. Comparing one Scripture with another; 3. Conferring in private about Scrip|tures, &amp; of any difficulties he hath, with other Chri&s;tians, of whom he may learn any thing; 4. Hearing of Sermons; 5. As a Magi&s;trate, he mu&s;t have a Politi|call prudence, and knowledge of Scriptures to direct him in judging about Su|per&s;tition, Here&s;ie, and matters of Religion; 6. He mu&s;t &s;erve him&s;elfe of prayer, and all the re&s;t of the meanes that God hath ordained him; 7. Nei|ther &s;ay we, that he mu&s;t be directed by a Synod alone. This is one of the meanes that God hath ordained him in his Providence, but not all, as this <HI>M. S.</HI> fal&s;ely would per&s;wade the Reader, if he be not altogether im|pertinent.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<PB N="59" REF="35">
<HEAD>Whether in the Militant vi&s;ible Church there &s;hould be any Subordination in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. I.</HI> Containing the State of the Que&s;tion.</HEAD>
<P>_TO the end we may the better, and more ea&s;ily re&s;olve this Que&s;tion, it will not be ami&s;&s;e to note concerning the word Church. 1. That we mean not here the Triumphant Church in Heaven, but the Militant upon Earth. 2. That it is not meant touching the invi&s;ible Church, <HI>viz.</HI> The Church of Beleevers, compounded of men and women, endowed with Ju&s;tifying Faith, which is invi&s;ible to us; but of the vi&s;ible Church, profe&s;&s;ing the true Faith. 3. Nor of every vi&s;ible Church of Beleevers, but of that which is compounded of all its Organicall Parts, <HI>viz.</HI> Preachers, Teachers, Ruling Elders, Deacons, and Flock. 4. It is to be ob&s;erved, That this Church is either Reall, or Repre&s;entative; We call Reall Churches, tho&s;e wherein &s;uch Church Officers, and Flocks, are really, as in every Pari&s;h, Provinciall or Nation Church: But a Repre&s;entative Church is that, wherein the Reall Church is repre&s;ented in Her Church Officers, as a Presbytery, Se&s;&s;ion, or Con&s;i&s;tory, con&s;i&s;ting of the Preachers and Ruling Elders, or the Deacons al&s;o of a Pari&s;h Church gathered together, for ordering of Church bu&s;ine&s;&s;e in Doctrine, Government, or otherwayes, who altogether repre&s;ent the Church of a Pari&s;h: A Cla&s;&s;e, that repre&s;enteth that of a Cla&s;&s;e, and judgeth of all the <HI>Church</HI> bu&s;ine&s;&s;e of one <HI>Cla&s;&s;e:</HI> A Provinciall Synod, which con&s;i&s;teth of the Mini&s;ters, and a certain number of Ruling Elders of one Province, repre&s;enting all the Reall <HI>Churches</HI> of &s;uch a Province, in judging of <HI>Church</HI> Affairs in that Province; and a Nationall Synod com|pounded of a certain number of Mini&s;ters and Ruling Elders, deputed from all the Provinces of the Nation, to judge of the <HI>Church</HI> bu&s;ine&s;&s;e in Doctrine, Di&s;cipline, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> which concerneth the whole <HI>Church</HI> of &s;uch a Nation or Kingdom.</P>
<PB N="60" REF="36">
<P N="2">2. Concerning the Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories, it is to be ob&s;erved, 1. That an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatory is nothing el&s;e but a certain num|ber of men, gathered together, and endowed with an Authoritative power, according to Gods will, to judge of <HI>Church</HI> bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, for Gods glory, and the Weal of the <HI>Church,</HI> or in a word, the Repre&s;entative <HI>Church</HI> of one Pari&s;h, Cla&s;&s;e, Province, Nation, or of all the World. 2. That Subordination in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories, is a Relation of Order, betwixt a Superiour, and an Inferiour Judicatory, or Repre&s;entative <HI>Church,</HI> whereby the Iudge|ment and Authority of the Inferiour, depends upon the Iudgement, and Authority of the Superiour: Such we conceive to be betwixt Presbyteries and Cla&s;&s;es, Cla&s;&s;es and Provinciall, Provinciall and Nationall, Nationall and Oecumenicall Synods.</P>
<P N="3">3. Here it would be noted, That this Subordination is grounded upon the Authoritative power of Superiour Iudicatories, over their Inferiours, or Sub|ordinated; and therefore here is to be noted, fir&s;t, That this Power of the <HI>Church</HI> is not Naturall, that floweth from the Nature, or E&s;&s;ence of the Sub|ject, &s;uch as are the Faculties of the Soul; nor Habituall, or an Habitude either Naturally acquired by <HI>Cu&s;tome,</HI> or Supernaturally infu&s;ed by Grace; for men may have all the Naturall Faculties of the Soul, and many Naturall, and Su|pernaturall Habitudes; yea, all tho&s;e that are nece&s;&s;ary for this Authoritative power, and yet not have it, as any one may ea&s;ily &s;ee in many learned and godly Divines, who are not Mini&s;ters of the <HI>Church,</HI> and con&s;equently have no Authoritative power in the <HI>Church:</HI> But it is a Morall power (ordinarily called <GAP DESC="foreign"> or <HI>pote&s;tas</HI>) whereby in vertue of Gods Ordinance, the Superiour <HI>Church</HI> hath power over the Inferiours, or other <HI>Churches</HI> &s;ubordinated unto Her, to rectifie their Iudgements in ca&s;e of Aberration, or to enjoyn them any thing according to Gods holy Ordinance. So when particular <HI>Churches</HI> judge any thing ami&s;&s;e either in Doctrine or Di&s;cipline, a <HI>Cla&s;&s;e</HI> or a <HI>Provin|ciall Synod</HI> may judge of that Iudgement, and in ca&s;e it finde it have need, may in the Name of God, command it to reform its Iudgement; and in ca&s;e of di&s;obedience, command the people not to obey their Pa&s;tors or Presbyte|ries commands; or if there be any thing, that concerneth the Weal of all the <HI>Churches</HI> in the Kingdom, the Nationall Synod hath an Authoritative power, to judge it, and enjoyn it upon the <HI>Churches</HI> in the Name of God; &s;o may a <HI>Provinciall Church</HI> do in things concerning all the <HI>Churches</HI> of a Province. I call an Authoritative power, that which may command, and in vertue of its command, enjoyn an obligation of Obedience upon all tho&s;e that are &s;ubject thereunto; and in ca&s;e of Di&s;obedience, inflict Spirituall puni&s;h|ments, according to the quality of the Di&s;obedience, <HI>viz.</HI> Simple Cen&s;ure, the le&s;&s;er or greater Excommunication.</P>
<P>If ye inquire further, what is this Morall power, or wherein it con&s;i&s;ts; I an&s;wer, It is no Reall, but a Morall being; it is no Reall quality in the Subject
<PB N="61" REF="36">that hath it, and con&s;equently it is no Reall or Naturall power; but as <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> were a Naturall power; for as our Naturall powers and faculties do flow from the E&s;&s;ence of the Subject, or from our E&s;&s;entiall Forms; &s;o doth this Morall power flow from the <HI>con&s;ent</HI> and <HI>will</HI> of them who give it, and his <HI>will,</HI> who <HI>con&s;ents</HI> to accept it; and this <HI>con&s;ent</HI> producing &s;uch a Morall power or <GAP DESC="foreign"> is no le&s;&s;e <HI>forma intern&egrave; vel extern&egrave; denominans, &amp; efficaciter</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>producens, qu&agrave;m forma e&s;&s;entialis</HI> is <HI>forma informans potentiam naturalem a &s;e, &amp; in &s;e vel in &s;ubjecto profundens.</HI> And as naturall powers are for the Weal of their Subjects, in accompli&s;hing and perfecting of them in their operations, con|venient to their nature; &s;o its this Morall power for the Weal of its Morall Subject, or of the con&s;ociation in perfecting it in its operations, convenient to its Morall being, Dome&s;ticall, Politicall or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, in Nature or in Grace. Wherefore <HI>Ame&s;ius,</HI> and &s;undry Independents, that follow his opinion, are mightily mi&s;taken, while&s;t they think it floweth from the E&s;&s;ence of the <HI>Church.</HI> 1. For it hath not its being from the E&s;&s;ence of the <HI>Church,</HI> but <HI>ex in&s;tituto divino.</HI> 2. Becau&s;e it is not produced nece&s;&s;arily, as Naturall proprieties, but freely and willingly, not as depending upon Nature, but up|on Will. 3. If it did flow from the E&s;&s;ence of the <HI>Church,</HI> God could not change it; And yet how&s;oever this Morall power hath no Reall being in it &s;elf; yet may it be called Reall; 1. In con&s;ideration of its Cau&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> Of the Reall de&s;tination of the Will, from which its produced. 2. Of its Foundati|on, <HI>viz.</HI> Becau&s;e it pre&s;uppo&s;eth &s;ome Reall qualities in him, or tho&s;e, who have it, <HI>viz.</HI> Naturall faculties, and &s;ome naturall or &s;upernaturall Abilities to exerci&s;e it. 3. Of its Effects that are Reall; for how&s;oever the power of a Magi&s;trate be not a Reall quality, yet it is able to produce very Reall Effects in Subjects, in remunerating &s;uch as de&s;erve well of the State, and in puni&s;h|ing Delinquents, as by impri&s;oning their per&s;ons, or cutting off their Heads, if the crime be of that nature.</P>
<P>Again it mu&s;t be ob&s;erved, That this Morall power is, 1. either meerly <HI>Directive,</HI> which onely &s;heweth what is to be done, or <HI>Imperative,</HI> that cannot onely &s;hew, or di&s;cern what is to be done; but al&s;o commands, and in vertue of &s;uch a command, bindes tho&s;e that are &s;ubject to &s;uch a Power to Obedience, and in ca&s;e of Di&s;obedience, inflicts condign puni&s;hments. 2. That this Morall power is either <HI>Civill</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall;</HI> the fir&s;t belongs to the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> the &s;econd to <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;ons.</HI> 3. That Power is either <HI>Imperiall, Royall,</HI> or <HI>Magi&s;teriall,</HI> &s;uch as <HI>Emperours, Kings,</HI> or <HI>Lords,</HI> have over their Subjects, as that of the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate;</HI> or <HI>Mi|ni&s;teriall,</HI> &s;uch as <HI>State-Mini&s;ters</HI> have under their Ma&s;ters, or Lords, as that of <HI>Amba&s;&s;adors, Pur&s;evants, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>Finally it mu&s;t be ob&s;erved, That as Power, &s;o puni&s;hments inflicted by Power, are either <HI>Civill</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall; Civill puni&s;hments</HI> are &s;uch as are inflicted by the <HI>Civil Magi&s;trate,</HI> and are often times corporall, as Mutilation,
<PB N="62" REF="37">Stigmatizing, and Death, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> &s;ometimes Pecuniary mulcts, &s;ometimes In|famy, <HI>&amp;c. Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall puni&s;hments</HI> are altogether Spirituall, con&s;i&s;ting of <HI>Cen&s;ures, Su&s;pen&s;ion</HI> from the <HI>Lords Table,</HI> and <HI>Excommunication.</HI></P>
<P>The&s;e things being pre&s;uppo&s;ed, By the word <HI>Church</HI> here mu&s;t be meant, the vi&s;ible <HI>Militant Church,</HI> and principally the <HI>Repre&s;entative Church,</HI> in <HI>Presbyteries, Cla&s;&s;es, Synods.</HI> 2. By the word <HI>Subordination,</HI> mu&s;t be meant a <HI>Subordination</HI> of <HI>Power</HI> and <HI>Judgement.</HI> 3. By <HI>Power</HI> mu&s;t be meant a <HI>Morall, Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall, Imperative,</HI> and <HI>Mini&s;teriall Power</HI> in Iudging, Commanding, and Inflicting of Spirituall puni&s;hments onely, and not an <HI>Imperiall, Magi&s;teriall,</HI> or <HI>Royall Power,</HI> whereby the <HI>Church</HI> may command in a domineering way, or compell mens bodies, or puni&s;h them by inflict|ing any Corporall puni&s;hment on them, or impo&s;ing any Pecuniary mulcts; as the Independents mo&s;t craftily go about to per&s;wade the World.</P>
<P>The Independents then deny, That there is any <HI>Church</HI> furni&s;hed with any <HI>Authoritative</HI> or <HI>Imperative Power,</HI> &s;ave onely the Pari&s;hionall, or to &s;peak in their own Terms, the <HI>Congregationall Church.</HI> And therefore they renounce all <HI>Cla&s;&s;icall</HI> and <HI>Synodicall Churches;</HI> or if they do acknowledge them, they allow them no <HI>Authoritative</HI> or <HI>Imperative,</HI> but a <HI>Con&s;ultative Power</HI> onely, or a Power to coun&s;ell one of their little <HI>Congregations</HI> (compounded happily of &s;even or eight per&s;ons) what they think fitte&s;t to be done; &s;o that this <HI>petty Congregation</HI> may either accept or reject their Coun&s;ell, at their own likings and plea&s;ure: &s;o as in conclu&s;ion, they acknowledge no <HI>Authoritative,</HI> or <HI>Imperative Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power,</HI> above that of their <HI>little Congregations;</HI> for they maintain, that every <HI>Church,</HI> be it never &s;o &s;mall, yea, though it be compo&s;ed but of &s;even or eight per&s;ons (be it never &s;o Erroneous and Here|ticall) is altogether Independent in its Iudgement, upon all the Iudgements of all the <HI>Churches</HI> of the World, be they never &s;o Iu&s;t and Orthodox; and con&s;equently, that what ever they teach, how Heretically &s;oever; and what ever they do, be it never &s;o wicked, that all the <HI>Orthodox Churches</HI> in the World, have no Authority of God to Cen&s;ure, or to Excommunicate, or &s;o much, as to command them, other wayes then any one private man might do an other, <HI>i. e.</HI> By way of Coun&s;ell, which they may either follow or reject at their plea&s;ure.</P>
<P>The <HI>Orthodox</HI> and <HI>Reformed Churches,</HI> e&s;pecially of <HI>Scotland, France,</HI> the <HI>Netherlands,</HI> &amp;c. on the other part hold, That there is and ought to be <HI>Sub|ordination</HI> among&s;t <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories, viz.</HI> That <HI>Nationall Synods</HI> are above <HI>Provinciall Synods;</HI> the&s;e above <HI>Cla&s;&s;es,</HI> and <HI>Cla&s;&s;es</HI> above <HI>Presby|teries</HI> or <HI>Se&s;&s;ions;</HI> and that the <HI>Superiour Judicatories</HI> have a <HI>Mini&s;teriall Au|thoritative</HI> or <HI>Imperative,</HI> but no <HI>Magi&s;teriall, De&s;poticall,</HI> or <HI>Imperiall, Au|thoritative power</HI> over the <HI>Inferiour,</HI> that are &s;ubordinate unto them. <HI>Item,</HI> That they may inflict upon <HI>Inferiour Churches,</HI> in ca&s;e of Di&s;obedience, <HI>Spirituall,</HI> though no <HI>Corporall puni&s;hments,</HI> or <HI>Pecuniary mulcts,</HI> or &s;uch like <HI>Civil puni&s;hments.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="63" REF="37">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. II.</HI> Containing &s;ome imaginary and ridiculous Contradictions objected by <HI>M.S. to A.S.</HI> removed.</HEAD>
<P>BUt before I prove my <HI>Conclu&s;ion,</HI> I mu&s;t pray the Reader to re-marke, in pa&s;&s;ing the fal&s;chood and manifold cavillations whereby this <HI>M.S.</HI> &s;alu|teth him in the entry of this Que&s;tion; for this is his &s;afe&s;t way for the pre|&s;ent, howbeit it cannot but prove damnable in the end; 1. He &s;aith, that <HI>Presbyterians</HI> agree not about the Author of this &s;ubordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call Judicatories, and Presbyterian Government, whether it be <HI>juris Divini,</HI> or <HI>Humani:</HI> As if &s;ome of them e&s;teemed it to be <HI>juris Divini;</HI> others, <HI>juris Humani, Eccle&s;ia&s;tici;</HI> others, <HI>juris Naturalis;</HI> others, <HI>partim juris Divini, partim Naturalis, aut mixti.</HI> 2. He &s;aith, that <HI>A.S.</HI> contradicteth him&s;elfe in the &s;ame manner. For refutation whereof, I need not but to propound our Opinion, which is thus: 1. All the <HI>Presbyterian</HI> Di&s;cipline, and &s;pecially &s;ub|ordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories, <HI>quoad E&s;&s;entialia, aut Sub&s;tantialia,</HI> in its E&s;&s;entiall parts, is <HI>juris Divini, aut Naturalis,</HI> i. e. authori&s;ed by Gods Divine Law, or by the Law of Nature. 2. <HI>Presbyterian Di&s;cipline, quoad acci|dentalia, &amp; circum&s;tantialia,</HI> i. e. in its accidentall or circum&s;tantiall parts, it may be <HI>juris Humani.</HI> Neither believe I, that there is any great di&s;pute a|mong&s;t us, and the <HI>Independents,</HI> about the&s;e Po&s;itions, unle&s;&s;e <HI>M.S.</HI> make it. Neither know I what can anger him in all this, &s;ave only this, that we give him no &s;ubject of quarrelling us; It may be, and it &s;eemeth, that he finds fault with the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition, wherein I &s;ay, it is either <HI>juris Divini, aut Natu|ralis:</HI> And, that he will have no Doctrine of Faith, or Di&s;cipline, that is <HI>juris Naturalis,</HI> i. e. grounded on the light of Nature. But,
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. What if the Scripture pre&s;uppo&s;e the truth of &s;ome Principles, known by Nature; dare he reject them?</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. Some of them are as certaine as any Article of Faith; as, for example, this; The one part of a Contradiction is true, and the other fal&s;e: and this, Twi&s;e ten are twenty. And yet none of them hath any formall Patent from Gods Word.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. If God be as well the Author of Naturall, as of Divine truth, wherefore will ye reject Naturall truth?</ITEM>
<ITEM>4. All men are bound to beleeve all Naturall truths, when they are &s;uffici|ently manife&s;ted unto them; or at lea&s;t, not to di&s;&s;ent from them, becau&s;e we mu&s;t not lye, as we are taught by the 9. Commandement, which not only forbiddeth us to misbelieve or contradict any Supernaturall, but al&s;o all Naturall truths &s;ufficiently manife&s;ted unto us.</ITEM>
<ITEM>5. But what rea&s;on hath this <HI>M.S.</HI> to reject Naturall truths, when there is nothing in Scripture to the contrary?</ITEM>
<ITEM>6. Yea, by the Law of Nature, I am bound to be ruled by them, in ca&s;e the
<PB N="64" REF="38">Scripture reveale me nothing above Nature: yea, I am not bound to goe a|bove them, but in the ca&s;es, that Scripture revealeth unto me.</ITEM>
<ITEM>7. What Law we were bound unto in the Old Te&s;tament, and is not abroga|ted in the New, that Law are we bound to follow, as a rule of direction in the New, yea, in Church-Di&s;cipline:
<LIST>
<ITEM>But the Law of Nature is a Law, whereunto we were bound in the Old Te&s;tament, and is not abrogated in the New; <HI>Ergo,</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>The Law of Nature is a Law, that we are bound to follow as a rule of dire|ction in the New Te&s;tament, yea, in Church-Di&s;cipline.</ITEM>
</LIST></ITEM>
<ITEM>8. It is holden among&s;t Prote&s;tants for an indubitable and &s;upernaturall truth, that Chri&s;ts body cannot be in two places at one time; which nei|ther <HI>M.S.</HI> nor all the Independent wit in the world is able to prove, unle&s;&s;e they &s;uppo&s;e this Principle of Nature, viz. <HI>One individuall Body actually exi|&s;tent, cannot at one time be in divers totall places</HI>] to be true: For the Scrip|ture po&s;eth it not formally, but pre&s;uppo&s;eth it to be true.</ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<P>Now I pray you, <HI>M.S.</HI> &s;hew me, wherein any Presbyterians contradict the&s;e A&s;&s;ertions, that I have laid down: you name none, and therefore I am not bound to an&s;wer. Only you &s;ay, I contradict my &s;elfe. But wherein? Becau&s;e (&s;aith <HI>M.S.</HI>) I &s;ay, p. 27. &sect;. 3.</P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. Subordination between &s;uperiour and inferrour Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudica|tories, is <HI>partim juris Divini, partim Natura lis aut mixti.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>2. This Subordination, &amp;c. needs not any patterne expre&s;ly and formally from Chri&s;t; It &s;ufficeth, that it have one from Nature, p. 36. &sect;. 2.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. And yet we can &s;hew a patent for it, not only from the Law of Nature, which &s;hould &s;uffice, but al&s;o from the Law of Grace, in the Old and New Te&s;taments.</ITEM>
<ITEM>4. It is only from God, that can give power to any man in his Church, <HI>pag.</HI> 48.</ITEM>
<ITEM>5. Only Gods Word is the rule or mea&s;ure, in matter of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall or Presbyteriall Government, p. 61.</ITEM>
<ITEM>6. Combined Presbyteries judge of Points of Doctrine and Di&s;cipline al|ready revealed in the holy Scripture, and give us new Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Lawes of things indifferent, p. 34.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> In my &s;econd Propo&s;ition, he putteth <HI>Patterne</HI> for <HI>Patent.</HI> 2. Here in all the&s;e Propo&s;itions there is no contradiction, neither &s;heweth <HI>M.S.</HI> wherein it con&s;i&s;teth here. It may be <HI>partim juris Divini,</HI> and <HI>partim Humani,</HI> 1. In re&s;pect of its divers parts, whereof &s;ome may be revealed in Scripture, and &s;ome proved by Naturall rea&s;on. 2. In re&s;pect of the &s;ame parts, which may be both known by Nature, and by Divine revelation, or &s;ome &s;uperveni|ent Divine Ordinance. So Divines hold, that we know God to be, both by Naturall Knowledge, and Supernaturall Revelation. 3. In &s;o far forth, as that which is <HI>juris Naturalis,</HI> is al&s;o <HI>juris Divini,</HI> when <HI>jus Divinum</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth
<PB N="65" REF="38"><HI>jus Naturale:</HI> for in &s;uch a ca&s;e, <HI>jus Naturale</HI> becommeth <HI>Divinum,</HI> not Thetically, but Hypothetically; not by any formall Divine Po&s;ition, but by &s;ome Divine reall Suppo&s;ition; as I &s;hew it cleerly in that pa&s;&s;age of my Book, that he citeth, p. 36.</P>
<P>The&s;e three la&s;t Propo&s;itions contradict not the re&s;t; For in the 4. Propo|&s;ition, p. 48. of my Book, I &s;peak not of the ground of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Di&s;cipline, nor of it all; only I &s;ay, that it is not in Church-Mini&s;ters power to transferre the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power unto the Civill Magi&s;trate: Which contradicteth not the fir&s;t three.</P>
<P>In the 5. <HI>Only Gods Word, &amp;c.</HI> But, 1. Gods Word, there, mu&s;t not be ta|ken &s;trictly, for that which is Gods Word <HI>formally, in terminis, &amp; Thetic&egrave;;</HI> but in a more large &s;ignification, 1. For Gods Word, <HI>formally,</HI> or by <HI>con&s;e|quence:</HI> 2. <HI>In terminis, aut in &s;en&s;u:</HI> 3. <HI>Thetic&egrave;, aut Hypothetic&egrave;,</HI> by &s;ome <HI>Po|&s;ition,</HI> or <HI>Suppo&s;ition.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. If ye take <HI>Gods Word</HI> in the la&s;t &s;en&s;e, then <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> or <HI>Government</HI> mu&s;t be taken for <HI>Di&s;cipline</HI> in its e&s;&s;entiall and principall integrant parts, and not in all its accidentall and circum&s;tantiall parts: Neither is it needfull, that we have any particular rules from Scripture, for every circum&s;tance of Doctrine or Di&s;cipline: As for example, That Sermons &s;hould be on &s;uch or &s;uch Week-dayes; &s;o long, viz. an houre, or two houres long; in the mor|ning, or afternoon; That Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Senates &s;hould &s;it once a day, once a week, or once a moneth.</P>
<P>In the 6. Propo&s;ition, 1. <HI>Di&s;cipline</HI> there, mu&s;t be taken for Di&s;cipline <HI>quoad E&s;&s;entialia, Sub&s;tantialia, &amp; Nece&s;&s;aria;</HI> and not <HI>quoad Accidentalia, Cir|cum&s;tantialia, Contigentia, &amp; Indifferentia;</HI> as appeareth by my words in the la&s;t part thereof, <HI>New Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Lawes in things indifferent, &amp;c.</HI> 2. <HI>Holy Scripture</HI> mu&s;t be taken in a large &s;ignification, as I have already declared: for &s;o only is it taken by our Doctors, when we prove again&s;t the Papi&s;ts, that it is the only Rule of Faith.</P>
<P>In the 2. Po&s;ition, when I &s;ay, <HI>Subordination needeth not, &amp;c.</HI> the word <HI>needeth</HI> mu&s;t not be taken for <HI>nece&s;&s;arium ab&s;olut&egrave;,</HI> or <HI>quoad e&s;&s;e;</HI> but, <HI>&s;ecundum quid, &amp; ad bene e&s;&s;e;</HI> not to its being, but to its well-being: for howbeit <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> had not given us any patent of <HI>Subordination in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories,</HI> in the Go&s;pel; yet the Law of Nature, and the Scripture of the Old Te&s;tament had been &s;ufficient to direct us therein, and had bound the Church of the New Te&s;tament to the <HI>Presbyterian</HI> Government: And this, <HI>M. S.</HI> acknowledgeth him&s;elfe, (howbeit not without &s;ome Comedian jeeres, more ordinary with him then any apparent Rea&s;on) and confe&s;&s;eth, that the words following in the 3. Propo&s;ition, declare it.</P>
<P>But put the ca&s;e, that <HI>Presbyterians</HI> differed (as he &s;aith) whether it be <HI>juris Divini, Naturalis, aut Humani:</HI> as they differ not, for any thing I know, or have read: Yet they agree in this, That it is <HI>Juris.</HI> Confe&s;&s;e this, and ye may
<PB N="66" REF="39">live in a Fraternall communion with us, for the Difference, viz. If one &s;ay, it is <HI>juris Divini;</HI> another, <HI>Naturalis;</HI> another, <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tici;</HI> will not breed a Schi&s;me; for it is not a Di&s;pute <HI>de re, &s;ed de modo rei,</HI> to know whether it proceedeth from God, as Author of the Law of Nature, or of Grace, by a Naturall, or a Po&s;itive Law: Much le&s;&s;e materiall is it to know, whether it be in Scripture <HI>explicit&egrave;,</HI> or <HI>implicit&egrave;; formaliter, aut per con&s;equentiam; in terminis, aut in &s;en&s;u, et con&s;equenter; Thetic&egrave;,</HI> or <HI>Hypothetic&egrave;.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. III.</HI> Containing the Arguments, whereby we prove the Opinion of the Orthodoxe Churches, again&s;t the <HI>Independents,</HI> borrowed from the Old Te&s;ta|ment.</HEAD>
<P>THe Arguments, that might be brought for the Orthodox <HI>Churches</HI> a|gain&s;t all Sectaries, are many, whereof I will touch a few, &s;ome from Scriptures of the Old and New Te&s;tament, and others from rea&s;on, founded on Scripture; but to proceed more cleerly, I intend to prove, 1. That in Scripture there is more, then a Congregationall, Independent <HI>Church;</HI> 2. a Subordination of <HI>Churches,</HI> and that in Authority.</P>
<P><HI>Whether in Scripture, or in Rea&s;on, we find more then a Congregationall Church?</HI></P>
<P>We affirme, and prove it thus, 1. Such a <HI>Church,</HI> and Church-government, as was among&s;t the people of God in the Old Te&s;tament, and is not abroga|ted in the New, may be admitted among&s;t his people in the New.</P>
<P>But a <HI>Church,</HI> and <HI>Church</HI> Government, more then Congregationall, and Independent, was among&s;t the people of God, in the Old Te&s;tament, and is not abrogated in the New Te&s;tament. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P>A <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>Church</HI> Government, more then Congregationall and Inde|pendent, may be admitted among&s;t his people in the New Te&s;tament.</P>
<P>As for the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition, I beleeve our Adver&s;aries will not deny it, for if it was in the Old Te&s;tament, it was either by Gods Ordinance, or by his Approbation; If God ordained it, how can they aboli&s;h it? If he approved it, how can they reprove it?</P>
<P>And for the A&s;&s;umption, I prove it; 1. For they had a Nationall <HI>Church; God dealt not &s;o vvith every Nation,</HI> P&s;al. 147.19, 20. Deut. 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10.13, 14, 20.23.33, 34.37. Deut. 7.6, 7, 8, 9, 10. Deut. 10.12.15.21. Deut. 26.17, 18, 19. Deut. 28.9, 10. Deut. 29.13, 14, 15. And Deut. 32. ver&s;. 8, 9. &amp;c. <HI>When the mo&s;t High divided to the Nations their Inheritance, when he &s;eperated the &s;ons of</HI> Adam; Iacob was the Lot of his Inheritance, &amp;c. Amos 3.2. <HI>You onely have I known of all the Families of the Earth.</HI> Deut. 39.29. <HI>Happy art thou, O I&s;rael, who is like unto thee, O People? &s;aved by the Lord, the &s;hield of thy help, and who is the &s;word of thy Encellency.</HI></P>
<PB N="67" REF="39">
<P N="2">2. Becau&s;e Independents define a Congregationall <HI>Church,</HI> a number of men, Covenanted together, to participate of Gods Ordinances, viz. the hearing of the <HI>Word,</HI> the receiving of the <HI>Sacraments &amp;c.</HI> in &s;ome one place, every Sabbath day.</P>
<P>But all the <HI>Church</HI> of the <HI>Jewes</HI> could not meet in one place, in &s;uch a fa&s;hi|on, as every man will ea&s;ily grant. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. Becau&s;e the great Sanedrim at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> judged of all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Cau&s;es throughout all the Kingdome.</P>
<P N="4">4. Becau&s;e the People of God, be&s;ides their A&s;&s;emblyes in the Temple (which was an holy place, common to all their Nationall <HI>Church</HI>) had their particular Conventions, in particular Synagogues.</P>
<P>And however men may doubt of the&s;e Synagogues, whether they were <HI>ex|in&s;tituto divino,</HI> or not, and of the <HI>time,</HI> when fir&s;t they began; yet can it not be denied, but if they were not <HI>divinae in&s;titutionis,</HI> they were, at lea&s;t, <HI>divinae approbationis.</HI> 1. For they are no where condemned in Scripture. 2. But Chri&s;t and his Apo&s;tles approved them, in that they went ordinarily to them, di&s;puted and expounded Scripture in them. 3. And &s;ubmitted them&s;elves unto the order and Di&s;cipline e&s;tabli&s;hed therein.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> But the Independents will &s;ay, that the Nationall <HI>Church</HI> is abro|gated in the New Te&s;tament.</P>
<P><HI>Iu&s;t.</HI> 1. Then it is their part, to point us to the place in the New Te&s;ta|ment, where it is abrogated.</P>
<P N="2">2. It cannot be abrogated in the New Te&s;tament; for tho&s;e Ordinances only of the Old Te&s;tament are abrogated in the New, that belonged unto the Ceremoniall Law: But to have a <HI>Church,</HI> or a <HI>Church</HI> Government, more then Congregationall, <HI>per &s;e,</HI> or con&s;idered in it &s;elfe, belong not to the <HI>Ceremoniall</HI> Law. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The Major is certaine, I prove the Minor. 1. For it might have been even in the State of Integrity, without the <HI>Ceremoniall</HI> Law. 2. And &s;o indeed it was after the Fall, before ever <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> his <HI>Ceremo|niall</HI> Law was made. 3. And that is not meerely <HI>Ceremoniall,</HI> whereof we may evidently give naturall rea&s;on, or that which is evidently grounded in naturall rea&s;on, or at lea&s;t in &s;o far as evidently grounded in naturall rea&s;on, &s;ince it is meerely Po&s;itive. But (&s;uppo&s;ing that there is a <HI>Church</HI> of God) to have, a <HI>Church,</HI> or a <HI>Church</HI> Government, more then Congregationall and Inde|pendent, is evidently grounded in naturall rea&s;on, or a thing where evi|dently we may give Naturall rea&s;on, &amp;c. as wee &s;hall &s;ee here|after. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. Only tho&s;e things of the Old Te&s;tament, are abrogated by the New, which were &s;hadows of things to come, viz. of Chri&s;t Reall, or Mi&s;tycall; But &s;uch a <HI>Church,</HI> i. e. more then a Congregationall, Independent <HI>Church,</HI> was not a &s;hadow of things to come in Chri&s;t, &amp;c. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The Major is certaine,
<PB N="68" REF="40">for the things commanded, or approved in the Old Te&s;tament, belonged, either to the Morall or to the Ceremoniall, or to the Judiciall Law: As for the things of the fir&s;t &s;ort, they are <HI>juris naturalis,</HI> and con&s;equently perpe|tuall, which are not abrogated, and of them&s;elves were not &s;hadows of things to come: As for tho&s;e of the Judiciall Law, of them&s;elves they are not &s;hadows, but belong unto Civill Government, which Chri&s;t abrogated not, &s;ince his Kingdom was not of this world; and if the Jews had &s;ubmitted them&s;elves to Chri&s;t, and had been freed from externall oppre&s;&s;ion, it is probable, that they &s;hould have enjoyed their own Government, according to the Judiciall Law, &s;o far forth as Judiciall; neither was it his aym to over|throw any worldly States, Policies, or Politicall Laws: Chri&s;ts Kingdom was, and is compatible with all the Kingdoms and States of the world, if they will not de&s;troy it; and he will let them reign over mens bodies and pur&s;es, if they can let him reign over their Souls. The&s;e, that were commanded in the Ceremoniall Law, were indeed &s;hadows; but &s;uch was not a Church more then Congregationall.</P>
<P>To all the&s;e Rea&s;ons &s;ome have an&s;wered, That they would have it proved by Scriptures of the New Te&s;tament, ju&s;t: 1. But wherefore prove they their opinion by the Old Te&s;tament, if they will not permit us the &s;ame liberty? 2. Our former Rea&s;ons have &s;ufficiently proved, That proofs taken from the Old Te&s;tament, &s;hould hold in all that, which is not abrogated in the New. 3. If in this Subject they reject the Scriptures of the Old Te&s;tament, as the Jews in all things that of the New, there will be two Errors Diametrically oppo&s;ite, the one to the other, theirs, and the Jews.</P>
<P>But to give them more contentment, we will prove it likewi&s;e by Texts of the New Te&s;tament; and fir&s;t, from that of the <HI>Acts,</HI> Chapters 1, 2, 4, and 5.</P>
<P N="2">2. A Church compounded of 8120. is more then a Pari&s;hionall, or Congre|gationall Independent Church.</P>
<P>But the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem, Acts</HI> 1.15. <HI>Acts</HI> 2.41. <HI>Acts</HI> 4.4. was a Church, compounded of 8120. yea, of more, as appeareth by <HI>Acts</HI> 5.14, 26. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P>The Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> was more, &s;ure then a Pari&s;hionall, or Congre|gationall Independent Church.</P>
<P>The Major Propo&s;ition is certain; for the Independents define their Church, which Chri&s;t in his Go&s;pel hath in&s;tituted, and to which he hath committed the Keyes of his Kingdom, the Power of binding and loo&s;ing, the Tables and Seales of the Covenant, the Officers and Cen&s;ures of his Church, the Admini&s;tration of his publike Wor&s;hip and Ordinances. <HI>Caetus,</HI> a company of Beleevers, meeting in one place every Lords day, for the Ad|mini&s;tration of the Holy Ordinances of God, to publike Edification. <HI>[The
<PB N="69" REF="40">Way of the Church of Chri&s;t in New England] The due Right of Presbyteries, Chap.</HI> 1. <HI>Prop.</HI> 1.] From hence I argue thus:</P>
<P>The Church, whereunto cannot be applyed this Definition, becau&s;e of its multitude, is more then an Independent Congregationall Church.</P>
<P>But a Church compounded of 8120, is a Church, whereunto cannot be applyed this Definition, <HI>&amp;c. Ergo.</HI></P>
<P>The Major is certain: The Minor I prove it; for 8120. could not meet together every Lords day in one Hou&s;e, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> For in tho&s;e times Chri&s;tians had not yet any Temples, but gathered together in particular Hou&s;es, which could not receive them all, 1. Becau&s;e they were not ordinarily &s;pacious, as great and rich mens Hou&s;es; for as the Apo&s;tle &s;ayeth, There <HI>are not many wi&s;e men after the fle&s;h, nor many mighty, nor many noble called, but the fooli&s;h, weak, ba&s;e, and de&s;pi&s;ed things of the world,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.26, 27, 28. 2. Howbeit they had been &s;pacious, as rich mens hou&s;es, yet could they not have received &s;uch a number. 3. Howbeit they could have received &s;uch a number, yet could not &s;uch a number have all heard a Mini&s;ter Preaching; yea, though he had the voice of a <HI>Stentor,</HI> &s;uch, as were not all the Apo&s;tles; for St. <HI>Paul</HI> had his voice very weak, <HI>His Letters</HI> (&s;ay they, <HI>i. e.</HI> his Adver&s;aries) <HI>are weighty and powerfull, but his bodily pre&s;ence is weak, and his &s;peech contemptible,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.10. 5. Howbeit, they could have all met together, to hear the Word, yet could they not meet together, to participate of the Lords Holy Table; for in tho&s;e times, the Cu&s;tome was to Communicate at Table &s;itting, according to the Cu&s;tome of other Orientall people, in circle, every one having his hand upon his fellows brea&s;t, and their feet without, which 8120. could not &s;o conveniently do in one room. 6. Put the ca&s;e they could have all heard the Word, and Communicated at the Lords Table together, yet could they not &s;o conveniently have voted in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Senates, or Iudica|tories, as they pretend every Member of the Church hath power to do, and as they do actually in ca&s;e of Appeal from the Presbytery, unto the people. For I put the ca&s;e, that tho&s;e 8120. &s;hould have gathered together, to judge in &s;ome matter of Doctrine, or Cen&s;ure, and that every one of the people &s;hould have employed one fourth part of an hour in delivering of his judge|ment, (whereas, Ile warrant you, &s;ome of them might employ a whole day, and at night &s;ay little to purpo&s;e) this voting would take up 20. or 30. hours: Put the ca&s;e again, they &s;hould &s;it four hours every day (which hardly every Trades-man can &s;pare) it &s;hould amount to 507. dayes, which is almo&s;t two yeers, omitting the Lords dayes; &s;o in gathering their votes once onely, there would be &s;pent nigh upon two yeers: But what if there &s;hould fall in many (put the ca&s;e ten or twelve) incidents, and that &s;ome of this Reverend Synod would protract the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, as &s;ome do here, to &s;pin out time, as we under|&s;tand? When &s;hould the&s;e bu&s;ine&s;&s;es be decided?</P>
<P>Again, What if &s;ome of the people, peradventure &s;ome con&s;iderable
<PB N="70" REF="41">number &s;hould be ab&s;ent (for appearingly they could not ever all be pre&s;ent) could any judgement given in their ab&s;ence, binde them to conde&s;cend unto it? If it could, it &s;hould be but a very blinde obedience; if not, there mu&s;t of nece&s;&s;ity be matter of Schi&s;me, which <HI>per &s;e</HI> would ordinarily fall out in &s;uch a Con&s;titution of an Independent Church. Many things will happily here be replied about divers compendious wayes of gathering of &s;uffrages, as in divers Senates, as among&s;t the Romans, Athenians, the Parliaments in <HI>France,</HI> in <HI>Venice, &amp;c.</HI> but to no purpo&s;e, for this extravagant fa&s;hion of voting of &s;o great multitudes, wherein every one pretends a liberty, or licen|tiou&s;ne&s;&s;e rather, in prophecying, whereunto &s;uch wayes of gathering of &s;uffrages can no wayes be applyed.</P>
<P>Some will an&s;wer, 1. That this Church, <HI>Acts</HI> 1. was an extraordinary Church, compounded of Apo&s;tles, who were extraordinary Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>In&s;t. The Text &s;ayeth not, that it was extraordinary or compounded of Apo&s;tles alone. 2. The Apo&s;tles were onely twelve, but this Church was of ten times twelve, <HI>i. e.</HI> of one hundred and twenty, <HI>Acts</HI> 1.15. and eight thou&s;and more. 3. The twelve Apo&s;tles could not make it extraordinary in number, in &s;uch a manner as that they could not meet together in one place; for they were but twelve, who might have been received in as &s;mall rooms, as other men.</P>
<P>Some will an&s;wer, 2. It may be &s;aid, That the Church, <HI>Acts</HI> 1. was but of one hundred and twenty per&s;ons.</P>
<P>In&s;t. I reply. But that of one hundred and twenty per&s;ons, and that of 8120. per&s;ons, was all one formally; and they differed onely in their matter, as an Infant, and a Man of fourty yeers. 2. That it &s;ufficeth, that a Church, according to Gods Ordinance, may be compounded of &s;o many per&s;ons, as are incompatible with the Con&s;titution of an Independent Church. 3. And howbeit it be not <HI>Acts</HI> 1. yet Scripture, <HI>Acts</HI> 2. and 4. is no le&s;&s;e Canoni|call, then <HI>Acts</HI> 1.4. and yet that pa&s;&s;age <HI>Acts</HI> 1. doth the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e; for that Church provided a Mini&s;ter for all the Churches of the World, which is more, then any Independent or Congregationall Church can do. And who|&s;oever calls this A&s;&s;embly, or the Acts thereof, extraordinary; yet may not the Independents do &s;o, &s;ince that from this place, &s;ome of them, as <HI>Robin&s;on, In&s;ti. p.</HI> 168, 169. proves an ordinary power in the Church to ordain, and depo&s;e Her Officers; the which proof &s;hould be very ridiculous and imper|tinent, if from an extraordinary Church, or an extraordinary Act, they &s;hould infer an ordinary Church, or an ordinary Act of an ordinary Church; It &s;hould be all one, as if they &s;hould prove, That Independents have power to rai&s;e the dead, becau&s;e the Apo&s;tles had &s;uch a power.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>Arg. Act.</HI> 5. After that vi&s;ible judgement of God, that befell <HI>Ananias</HI> and <HI>Saphira, ver&s;.</HI> 5, 10. Beleevers were the more added unto the Lord, multitudes both men and women, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 14. The number of the Di&s;ciples were
<PB N="71" REF="41">much more multiplied, cap. 6. v. 1. in Hieru&s;alem <HI>greatly,</HI> and a great company of the Prie&s;ts were obedient to the Faith, ver. 7. who could not all meet to|gether.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 4. Act. 6. v. 1. When the <HI>number of the Di&s;ciples was multiplied, there aro&s;e a murmuring of the Grecians again&s;t the Hebrewes, becau&s;e their widowes were neglected in the dayly mini&s;tration;</HI> whereupon there were appointed 7 Deacons for all the Churches of <HI>Iudaea,</HI> and &s;undry others: for the Church was compounded of people of divers Countries, <HI>Act.</HI> 2.9, 10, 11. This Argu|ment proveth very probably, that at <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> there was more then an In|dependent Church, &s;ince it ordained Church-Officers for &s;undry Congrega|tions, or at lea&s;t for a Church, which could not meet in one place.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. IV.</HI> The &s;ame Doctrine proved from <HI>Act. 13.14.15. and 16 chap.</HI> of the Church of Hieru&s;alem, and Antioch.</HEAD>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 5. SO <HI>Act.</HI> 15. in that di&s;pute of S. <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> with &s;ome Phari&s;es converted to the Faith, about <HI>Circumci&s;ion,</HI> and the <HI>Ob|&s;ervation of the Ceremoniall Law,</HI> at <HI>Antioch;</HI> it was re&s;olved, that the que|&s;tion &s;hould be determined by the <HI>Church,</HI> that was at <HI>Hieru&s;alem:</HI> as it was. From whence I argue thus:
<LIST>
<ITEM>That <HI>Church,</HI> to who&s;e judgement other <HI>Churches</HI> &s;ubmitted them&s;elves, and which gave out Decrees or Sentences to be obeyed by other <HI>Churches,</HI> was more then an <HI>Independent Congregationall Church:</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>But the <HI>Church</HI> that was gathered at <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> was a <HI>Church,</HI> to who&s;e judgement other <HI>Churches</HI> &s;ubmitted them&s;elves, or to which they were bound to &s;ubmit, and which gave out Decrees or Sentences to be obeyed by other <HI>Churches:</HI> Ergo,</ITEM>
<ITEM>The <HI>Church,</HI> that was gathered at <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> was more then a <HI>Congre|gationall Independent Church.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<P>The <HI>Major</HI> is certaine; for no &s;imple Congregationall Church can give out Decrees and Sentences, to be obeyed by other Churches; nor will other Independent Congregationall Churches &s;ubmit thereunto.</P>
<P>The <HI>Minor</HI> is certaine. 1. For, <HI>The Church of Antioch determined, that Paul, and Barnabas, and certaine others of them &s;hould goe up to Hieru&s;alem unto the Apo&s;tles and Elders, about that que&s;tion,</HI> Act. 15.2. 2. Becau&s;e the <HI>judgment</HI> of the Church of <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> is called a <HI>Sentence,</HI> v. 19. <HI>A burden; To lay no greater burden upon you,</HI> v. 28. Item, <HI>Decrees</HI> and <HI>Ordinances: They delivered them the Decrees to keep, that were ordained for the Apo&s;tles and Elders, which were at Hieru&s;alem,</HI> cap. 16. v, 4. 3. Becau&s;e not only the Church or Churches in <HI>Antioch,</HI> but al&s;o all tho&s;e of <HI>Syria</HI> and <HI>Cilicia</HI> were bound to obey them, &s;ince they were delivered them by the Apo&s;tles, Evangeli&s;ts, and Di&s;ciples, <HI>to keep,</HI> cap. 16.4. 4. Becau&s;e the &s;tile of the Epi&s;tle, and of the Iudgement, ar|gueth
<PB N="72" REF="42">authority over the Churches: As that, Act. 15.24. <HI>To whom we gave no &s;uch commandement:</HI> Ergo, They had power to command them to <HI>preach.</HI> And the Phari&s;es appearingly pretended to have had &s;ome &s;uch commande|ment from that <HI>Church</HI> at <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> as &s;ome inferre from this Text. Item, <HI>It &s;eemed good to the Holy Gho&s;t, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden, then the&s;e nece&s;&s;ary things,</HI> Act. 15.25. 5. Becau&s;e they commanded the <HI>Churches</HI> &s;ome things indifferent in them&s;elves; as, <HI>to ab&s;taine from meats offered to Idols,</HI> and <HI>from blood,</HI> and from <HI>things &s;trangled,</HI> v. 29. What may be an&s;wered to this Rea&s;on, we &s;hall, God willing, &s;ee hereafter.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 6. The <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Antioch</HI> is one, and yet it is probable, that there were many <HI>Congregationall Churches</HI> there; for <HI>many of the Jewes and Religi|ous Pro&s;elytes</HI> at Antioch <HI>followed Paul and Barnabas,</HI> Act. 13. v. 43. <HI>And the next Sabbath day, came almo&s;t the whole City together, to heare the Word of God,</HI> v. 44. And <HI>the Word of the Lord was publi&s;hed throughout all the Region,</HI> v. 49. &s;o that there were many, that profe&s;&s;ed Chri&s;t. So <HI>there were certaine Prophets,</HI> and <HI>Teachers,</HI> as <HI>Barnabas, Simeon, Lucius, Manahem,</HI> Act. 13. v. 1. and &s;undry others, which had <HI>come down from Iudea,</HI> Act. 15. v. 1. Now it is not credible, that where there were &s;o many Beleevers, and &s;o many Preachers, but there mu&s;t have been many Congregations, and yet they are all called <HI>one Church,</HI> Act. 14. v. 27.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. V.</HI> The &s;ame Doctrine proved by the Church of Corinth, <HI>1 Cor. 1. 2 Cor. 1. Act. 18.</HI> and of Ephe&s;us, <HI>Act. 19.</HI></HEAD>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 7. SO, 1 Cor. 1.2. 2 Cor. 1.1. the Church of Corinth is called a Church. There <HI>Paul rea&s;oned in the Synagogue every Sabbath day, and per|&s;waded the Jewes and the Greeks,</HI> Act. 18.4. <HI>And Cri&s;pus the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue beleeved on the Lord with all his hou&s;e; and many of the Corinthians hearing, beleeved, and were baptized, v.</HI> 8. <HI>And the Lord &s;pake by vi&s;ion to Paul, &s;aying, I have much people in this City,</HI> v. 10. <HI>Paul continued there a yeere and &s;ix moneths,</HI> v. 11. God promi&s;ed him, <HI>that no man &s;hould &s;et on him to hurt him,</HI> v. 10. <HI>The Iewes, that had made an in&s;urrection again&s;t him,</HI> v. 12. were drawn from the <HI>Iudgement &s;eat</HI> by <HI>Gallio</HI> the Pro-Con&s;ul or Deputy of <HI>A|chaia,</HI> v. 18. <HI>So&s;thenes,</HI> the <HI>chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue,</HI> beaten away by the Greeks, v. 17. This <HI>Gallio</HI> was not <HI>Pauls,</HI> or the Chri&s;tians enemy, as appea|reth by all his proceedings, v. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18. where it is to be ob&s;erved, that <HI>Corinth</HI> was the Metropolis of <HI>Achaia,</HI> &s;o potent and opulent, that it might have di&s;puted the Empire of the World with any other, which the Romans reckoned only three in the World fit to do, viz. <HI>Carthage, Corinth,</HI> and <HI>Capua.</HI> Now &s;ince the City was &s;o great, &s;o rich, &s;o populous, and <HI>S. Paul</HI> by &s;o &s;peciall a manner of Divine providence and promi&s;e a&s;&s;i&s;ted there, &s;o as that <HI>Cri&s;pus</HI> the chiefe Ruler of the Synagogue was converted, <HI>Gallio</HI>
<PB N="73" REF="42">the Procon&s;ul became <HI>Pauls</HI> friend, and peradventure not far from the King|dome of Heaven; <HI>S. Pauls</HI> credit &s;o great, that the <HI>Iewes</HI> were <HI>drawn</HI> from the <HI>Tribunall &s;eat,</HI> and <HI>So&s;thenes beaten away;</HI> &s;o many <HI>Corinthians</HI> converted, and that he abode there &s;o long: What a number, in all probability, mu&s;t have been converted? Out of all doubt, more then could conveniently meet to|gether in one hou&s;e, to participate of all Chri&s;ts Ordinances: And it was not <HI>Pauls</HI> cu&s;tome to &s;tay long in any place, where the Go&s;pel was much contra|dicted, or pro&s;pered not, as we may collect from the 6. ver&s;e of this chapter, and from chap. 19. v. 9.</P>
<P><HI>Arg.</HI> 8. We may prove as much from the 19. chapter, concerning the City of <HI>Ephe&s;us:</HI> where I pray the Reader to con&s;ider, how <HI>Ephe&s;us</HI> was a very potent, rich, and populous City of <HI>A&s;ia minor,</HI> of great Trading in regard of its &s;ituation betwixt the South and We&s;t, it being the way to &s;aile from <HI>Syria</HI> and <HI>Egypt</HI> into <HI>Greece</HI> and <HI>Macedonia.</HI> For all the&s;e rea&s;ons it was very fa|mous, as al&s;o for the Temple of <HI>Diana,</HI> its Idolatry, and many curious Arts there profe&s;&s;ed, as Naturall, and Diabolicall Magick; the profe&s;&s;ion whereof, &s;ome Independents, as it is related by <HI>M. S.</HI> u&s;e, it &s;hould &s;eeme, now and then, to con&s;ult about men of Letters, and their Books, in the&s;e ca|lamitous times of Reformation. About that time that <HI>S. Paul</HI> taught there, there was one <HI>Apollonius Thyanaeus,</HI> who, as it is related of him, erected a Schoole of Magick there, who by the voice of Birds knew their very imagi|nations and de&s;ires, &amp;c. This man was <HI>Chri&s;ts,</HI> and <HI>S. Pauls</HI> enemy, as it is related of him. We have al&s;o an Adage in <HI>Era&s;mus, Ephe&s;iae literae,</HI> which were &s;ome Magick <HI>characters,</HI> and <HI>words,</HI> which made &s;uch as caried them, victorious in all they undertook: See more about them in that Adage, in the Title <HI>Impo&s;turae.</HI> Without doubt, <HI>Paul</HI> converted here more then could meet in one Congregation; and yet it is called a <HI>Church.</HI> 1. At his fir&s;t entry, by the impo&s;ition of his hands, he gave the Holy Gho&s;t unto 12 Di&s;ciples, or ra|ther, it was given them by Je&s;us Chri&s;t, upon the impo&s;ition of his hands, &s;o that <HI>they &s;pake with Tongues, and prophe&s;ied,</HI> v. 6. and &s;o there was now a good number of good In&s;truments. 2. He <HI>di&s;puted boldly in the Synagogue</HI> for the &s;pace of <HI>three moneths, per&s;wading the things concerning the Kingdome of God,</HI> v. 8. which he could not have done, unle&s;&s;e he had had many good friends there. 3. Afterwards, <HI>daily in the Schoole of one Tyrannus,</HI> for the &s;pace of <HI>two yeeres,</HI> v. 9.10. which without doubt he had not continued to doe &s;o long, if the Go&s;pel had not had great fruits there; for &s;o &s;oon as &s;ome &s;pake evill of it, in the Synagogue, the Text &s;ayes, <HI>He &s;eparated his Di&s;ciples</HI> from it. I know, that there is &s;ome di&s;pute about the&s;e words, <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>in Schola Ty|ranni cuju&s;dam,</HI> v. 9. &s;ome thinking, that <HI>Tyrannus</HI> is a proper name, others, that it is a common name, &s;ignifying &s;ome great-man, of great credit and au|thority, as &s;ome great Lord, perchance: and <HI>Schola</HI> may &s;ignifie a Schoole, is a Hall, or place of recreation, &s;uch as Noblemen u&s;e to have: But however
<PB N="74" REF="43">it be taken, this Text proveth plainly, that <HI>S. Paul</HI> had great credit, was in a high e&s;t<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter">eme, and that the Go&s;pel had a great progre&s;&s;e, and a happy &s;ucce&s;&s;e. 4. But let this <HI>Tyrannus</HI> be the proper name of &s;ome Ma&s;ter, or Profe&s;&s;or in a Colledge, as <HI>Tyrannus Sophi&s;ta,</HI> as <HI>Baronius</HI> would have him to be, <HI>tom.</HI> 1. <HI>Annal.</HI> or any other; it is a &s;igne, whatever he was, that he was not contrary, but became a great friend to the Go&s;pel, &s;ince he permitted <HI>S. Paul</HI> to teach &s;o long in his Colledge, during which time, it is probable, he might be con|verted him&s;elfe. 5. If it be a common name, or &s;ignifies any great Lord, and that <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;ignifie &s;ome great Hall, <HI>Porticum,</HI> or &s;pacious place, as &s;ome will have it to doe; it is a &s;igne, that he had great credit, and acce&s;&s;e to great men, &s;ince he had &s;uch an Hou&s;e at command to make a Schoole of, and that for &s;o long time together, as the &s;pace of <HI>two yeeres:</HI> Without all doubt, a Noble|man, that would endure this trouble for the Go&s;pel, was not far from Chri&s;t, if he was not a Chri&s;tian altogether; for Noblemen willingly never favour pretended Novelties, &s;uch as the Go&s;pel was among&s;t the Ephe&s;ians. 6. And if <HI>S. Paul</HI> made choice of &s;uch a place, to the end he might be protected by the Lord of it, as many of the Expo&s;itors of this place are of opinion; without all doubt, there were a great party there Chri&s;tians; for Noblemen willingly will not hazard their e&s;tates for Religion, nor &s;uffer publike exerci&s;e of a new Religion in their hou&s;es, nor protect Novelties of &s;o great con&s;equence, if they &s;ee any danger, or feare a &s;tronger party: and therefore in all proba|bility, the Chri&s;tians were very &s;trong there, &s;ince they had &s;uch publick exer|ci&s;e of their Religion, and &s;o many friends, and tho&s;e of the greate&s;t. 7. This may be confirmed further, by the great apprehen&s;ion that <HI>Demetrius,</HI> and all the Silver-Smiths had conceived of their utter undoing, by rea&s;on of the notable progre&s;&s;e of the Go&s;pel; and by the tumult that he made, which, it is like, he would not have done, unle&s;&s;e he had mightily apprehended the party of the Chri&s;tians, and the undoing of <HI>Diana,</HI> and her Temple; And by his di&s;cour&s;e, viz. that <HI>Paul</HI> had per&s;waded much people, not in <HI>Ephe&s;us</HI> alone, but almo&s;t throughout all <HI>A&s;ia.</HI> 8. Becau&s;e, howbeit in this tumult the people had laid hold on <HI>Gaius</HI> and <HI>Ari&s;tarchus, Pauls</HI> companions, and ru&s;hed into the Theatre; yet did they them no harme, for feare, in all likelihood, of the Chri&s;tians party; for <HI>feare fell on them all,</HI> v. 12.9. And all this may be con|firmed, for that <HI>Paul</HI> had many of the greate&s;t of <HI>A&s;ia</HI> for his friends, as ap|peareth from the 31. ver&s;e, who hindred him to enter into the tumult, for feare he &s;hould receive any hurt: And the Great men, doubtle&s;&s;e, drew many of meaner condition after them. 10. Becau&s;e <HI>S. Paul</HI> wrought great miracles among&s;t them, to the terror of &s;ome, to the admiration of others, and to the great contentment and profit of others: To the terror of &s;ome, as appeareth by the accidents that befell &s;ome <HI>Exorei&s;ts</HI> of the Iewes, the &s;onnes of <HI>Sceva,</HI> chiefe of the Prie&s;ts; after the which, the Text &s;aith, <HI>fearefell upon them,</HI> v. 17. To the admiration of others, becau&s;e <HI>miracles,</HI> they are admirable, and e&s;peci|ally
<PB N="75" REF="43">tho&s;e that are unimitable by others: To the contentment and profit of o|thers, becau&s;e that the handkerchiefes or aprons caried from <HI>S. Pauls</HI> body, <HI>cured their di&s;ea&s;es,</HI> and <HI>cha&s;ed a way the evill &s;pirits out of them,</HI> v. 12. the which could not but draw very many Di&s;ciples unto him. 11. Becau&s;e all the&s;e things were known to all the Iewes and Greeks of <HI>Ephe&s;us,</HI> which could not be, without at lea&s;t a toleration, and &s;ome approbation of tho&s;e that were in authority: and &s;o the Party was great and &s;trong. 12. Becau&s;e this being <HI>known to them all, the name of the Lord Ie&s;us was magnified,</HI> v. 17.13. Becau&s;e <HI>many that beleeved, came and confe&s;&s;ed their deeds,</HI> v. 18. So then many be|leeved. 14. Becau&s;e <HI>many of them al&s;o, which u&s;ed curious Arts, burned their Books, amounting to the &s;um of</HI> 15000. <HI>pieces of &s;ilver,</HI> v. 19. yet it is not &s;aid, that they all, but that many of them burned their Books; &s;o that be&s;ides tho&s;e Magicians who burned their Books, there mu&s;t have been many other Magici|ans converted; And yet tho&s;e Books being of &s;o great a value, could not but belong to many; and indeed the Text calleth them many. Now in a great City, ordinarily, are but a &s;mall number that give their minds to Letters, but far le&s;&s;e, that give their minds to Sciences, and yet fewer, that apply their minds to curious Arts and Sciences; and yet here they were many. Note yet, that the&s;e curious Arts could not be Naturall Magick, nor Iudiciall A&s;trologie, Phy&s;iognomy, &amp;c. for the&s;e Arts being lawfully u&s;ed, are lawfull, and there|fore it had been no need to burne the Books which treated of them, it had been much better to &s;ell them for the nece&s;&s;ities of di&s;tre&s;&s;ed Chri&s;tians; <HI>ergo,</HI> they mu&s;t have been &s;ome Diabolicall Arts, &s;uch as <HI>Apollonius Thyanaus</HI> pro|fe&s;&s;ed, whereunto belonged tho&s;e <HI>Literae Ephe&s;iae</HI> al&s;o. Now of all tho&s;e, who are given to curious Arts, very few are given to Diabolicall Arts again&s;t na|ture: fince then there were &s;o many of &s;uch Diabolicall Scholars, who&s;e con|ver&s;ion, above all other men, is the harde&s;t; how many might there have been of other men of Letters converted? but how many more of the People? It is probable, that <HI>Tyrannus</HI> Schoole was a Schoole of Magick, and perad|venture, <HI>Apollonius Thyanaus</HI> was his <HI>Second</HI> or <HI>&V;&s;her,</HI> and had the title of <HI>Profe&s;&s;or,</HI> in his ab&s;ence; and, that <HI>the Word of God grew &s;o mightily, and pre|vailed,</HI> as the Text &s;aith, v. 20. by the meanes of <HI>S. Pauls</HI> Mieacles, whereby the Devill, and all his Magicians were &s;o mightily affronted; and that tho&s;e Magicians being &s;o affronted and converted, many others were converted by their example. 15. It is to be noted, that all the&s;e things, viz. Miracles, Con|ver&s;ion of &s;o many to the Go&s;pel among&s;t them, their Profe&s;&s;ion thereof, and the burning of tho&s;e Bookes, were done publikely, which appearingly they would not have done, if they had not had a &s;trong Party, and had been a very great number; Dur&s;t a few men, or many incon&s;iderable men &s;o publikely have renounced the Religion of their Country, and their Great <HI>Diana</HI> of <HI>Eg|phe&s;us,</HI> if they had not been backed with force enough? For how&s;oever per|chance &s;ome zealous men might have done &s;o, yet is it &s;earce credible, that
<PB N="76" REF="44">many would have done it; for of tho&s;e, who receive Chri&s;t, many, yet the be&s;t men are &s;undry times tempted with feare, as we &s;ee in St. <HI>Peter</HI> his denying his Ma&s;ter, and in all the Apo&s;tles in flying away; neither is it ever|more needfull, that we make &s;o open profe&s;&s;ion of Chri&s;t, when we may ap|pearingly &s;uffer for him; for the &s;heep may fly away from the Wolfe, as the woman fled into the wilderne&s;&s;e to hide her &s;elfe for a while.</P>
<P>This Conclu&s;ion may be further confirmed by &s;undry other Texts of Scripture; and, 9. by Act. 20.7, 8, 9. There was &s;uch a throng at St. <HI>Pauls</HI> Ser|mon, which he made in an upper Chamber in the night upon occa&s;ion of his departure from <HI>Troas,</HI> that <HI>Eutychus,</HI> and doubtle&s;&s;e al&s;o &s;ome others were forced to &s;it in the windows; note that this was in the night; what a throng might there have been, had it been on the Day time: out of all doubt, the Chamber would not have held them all: but certainly they could not meet every Lords-day in any one Roome, &s;uch as were their places of meeting in tho&s;e times, and con&s;equently there mu&s;t have been there more, then one of the Independent Congregationall Churches.</P>
<P N="10">10. We have al&s;o cleer Texts of Scripture to prove, that the Church is taken for a greater, then for any Independent Congregation, as <HI>Act.</HI> 8.1. <HI>And at that time, there was a great per&s;ecution again&s;t the Church, that was at Hieru&s;alem;</HI> This Per&s;ecution was not again&s;t one onely Independent Congregationall Church, but again&s;t the whole Churches of Iudea.</P>
<P N="11">11. So in the &s;ame Chap. ver&s;. 3. <HI>Saul made havocke of the Church.</HI> And chap. 9.1. <HI>breathing out threatnings and &s;laughter again&s;t the Di&s;ciples of the Lord:</HI> now of this Church &s;ome members were in <HI>Dama&s;cus,</HI> v. 2. &s;o he &s;ayes of him&s;elfe, I per&s;ecuted the Church, 1. Cor. 15.9. Phil. 3.6. from whence I argue thus,</P>
<P>The Church that <HI>Saul</HI> per&s;ecuted, was greater then a particular Congrega|tion, or an Independent Church.</P>
<P>But the Church here meant, is that which <HI>Saul</HI> per&s;ecuted. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The Church here meant, is greater then a particular Congregation. The Mi|nor is certain; the Major I prove it; for he per&s;ecuted not one onely parti|cular Congregation, but that, wherever there were Di&s;ciples of the Lord, chap. 9.1. in <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> chap. 8. ver&s;. 1.3. and in <HI>Dama&s;cus,</HI> chap. 9. v. 1.2.</P>
<P N="12">12. <HI>And,</HI> Act 12.1. <HI>Herod the King &s;tretched out his hand to vex certaine of the Church.</HI> Here the word <HI>Church</HI> mu&s;t &s;ignifie more, then a <HI>particular</HI> Congregation; for <HI>Herod</HI> did it to plea&s;ure the Iewes, which he could not have done, in vexing the members of <HI>one particular Church</HI> alone. 2. Be|cau&s;e here mu&s;t be meant the <HI>Church,</HI> whereof <HI>Peter</HI> was a Member, v. 3. which was not one <HI>particular Church</HI> alone, but that of all <HI>Judea,</HI> &s;ince <HI>Peter</HI> and <HI>John</HI> had a particular Vocation, Mi&s;&s;ion, or Commi&s;&s;ion to teach there, as <HI>Paul</HI> to the <HI>Gentiles, Gal.</HI> 2.7. or rather of the whole <HI>Militant Church</HI> of their time, &s;ince they were <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> or <HI>&V;niver&s;all Mini&s;ters</HI> of the Go&s;pel.
<PB N="77" REF="44">3. Becau&s;e if the <HI>Church</HI> here &s;ignifie a <HI>particular Church,</HI> whereof <HI>Peter</HI> and <HI>Iames</HI> were Members; then that <HI>Church</HI> might have depo&s;ed them of their Mini&s;tery: For the <HI>Independents</HI> grant this Authority to their Churches over their Pa&s;tors: And if it be &s;aid, that they have it over particular, but not over univer&s;all Pa&s;tors, as the Apo&s;tles: <HI>Ergo.</HI> If they acknowledge them to be univer&s;all Pa&s;tors, they mu&s;t have univer&s;all Flocks, or <HI>Churches;</HI> &s;o there was an univer&s;all Militant Church upon Earth, whereof they were Pa&s;tors in their time, which is more then a <HI>particular Congregation.</HI> 4. Put the ca&s;e they had been but Mini&s;ters of <HI>particular Churches</HI> or <HI>Congregations,</HI> yet mu&s;t the word <HI>Church</HI> there &s;ignifie a <HI>Church,</HI> whereof they were both Members, for &s;uch a Church is meant here, v. 7.2, 3. But &s;uch a <HI>Church</HI> mu&s;t be more then a <HI>particular</HI> one, for it mu&s;t containe both their <HI>Churches,</HI> and Per&s;ons, &s;ince they are called &s;ome of the Church, i. e. of one Church.</P>
<P N="13">13. So ver&s;. 5. <HI>But Prayer was made without cea&s;ing of the Church unto God for him,</HI> i. e. for <HI>Peter,</HI> who was in Pri&s;on; And out of all doubt this was not one onely Independent Church, but all the Churches that knew of <HI>Peters</HI> impri&s;on|ment, and depended upon him, as upon their Pa&s;tor.</P>
<P N="14">14. <HI>Give no offence, neither to the Jewes, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God,</HI> 1 Cor. 10.32. which cannot be a &s;imple <HI>Independent Church,</HI> but all the <HI>Churches</HI> we conver&s;e with; 1. for Charity bindeth us to give no offence to all, or any of them. 2. Becau&s;e this <HI>Church</HI> is called the <HI>Church</HI> of God, which cannot be re&s;trained to one <HI>particular Church,</HI> if they be all the Church of God. 3. Becau&s;e it is oppo&s;ed to the Iewes, and the Gentiles.</P>
<P N="15">15. Becau&s;e the <HI>Church,</HI> wherein God did place Apo&s;tles, and Evangeli&s;ts, 1. Cor. 12.28. was not an <HI>Independent Congregation,</HI> but more; for they were <HI>univer&s;all</HI> Mini&s;ters of the Militant Church of their time; now if there be an univer&s;all Militant Church through all the world, how much rather may we admit a Provinciall or Nationall Church?</P>
<P N="16">16. <HI>I had rather &s;peak five words,</HI> &s;aith St. Paul, <HI>with my under&s;tanding in the Church then,</HI> &amp;c. 1. Cor. 14.19. This Church, wherein the Apo&s;tle de&s;ires to &s;peake, is more then an <HI>Independent Congregation;</HI> for he was not tyed to any particular Congregation.</P>
<P N="17">17. The Apo&s;tle willeth women to keepe &s;ilence in the Churches, 1. Cor. 14.38. and the&s;e Churches are called the <HI>Church, It is a &s;hame for a Woman to &s;peake in the Church,</HI> ver&s;. 35. which cannot be a particular <HI>Congregation;</HI> for he willeth them not to &s;peake in any Church.</P>
<P>We may bring many other Pa&s;&s;ages of Scripture, and Rea&s;ons; but becau&s;e they &s;erve both for this, and the next Conclu&s;ion, therefore to decline repeti|tions, we remit them unto that Conclu&s;ion.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<PB N="78" REF="45">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VII.</HI> The Second Conclu&s;ion, concerning the Subordination of Authority in the Church.</HEAD>
<P>SEcondly I &s;ay,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Conclu&s;.</NOTE> that betwixt the Churches of God, there &s;hould be &s;ome Subordination in authority, i. e. &s;uch, as wherein the judgements of inferior Churches, and their proceedings may be &s;ubject unto the judgement of the Superiour Church, whereunto they are Subordinate: And this may be proved &s;ufficiently from all the Te&s;timonies of Scripture, a|leadged for the former Conclu&s;ion; For if there be a <HI>Church</HI> more then a <HI>par|ticular Congregationall,</HI> viz. <HI>Provinciall,</HI> or <HI>Nationall,</HI> out of all doubt, the <HI>particular Congregations</HI> mu&s;t be &s;ubject to them, 1. becau&s;e a part is &s;ub|ject unto the whole, as the hand unto the whole body; <HI>nam pars magis &s;ui totius quam &s;ui;</HI> item, becau&s;e the part is for the whole, as a <HI>medium</HI> for its <HI>end:</HI> now the <HI>Mediums</HI> mu&s;t be &s;ubject unto their <HI>Ends,</HI> and not the <HI>Ends</HI> unto their <HI>Mediums;</HI> and <HI>Media commen&s;urantur finibus, non fines Mediis;</HI> neither &s;hape we the hor&s;e back for the &s;addle, but the &s;addle for the hor&s;e his back; &s;o the government of particular Churches mu&s;t not be &s;haped or fra|med according to their particular exigencies and conveniencies alone, but ac|cording to that of the whole Provinciall, Nationall, and Univer&s;all Militant Church here upon Earth, in &s;uch a manner, that it hinder it not.</P>
<P N="2">2. Particularly, it may be proved from the Cu&s;tome of the Old Te&s;tament, which is not abrogated in the New; for therein the Iudgements of Synagogi|call A&s;&s;emblies were &s;ubject unto that of the middle Sanedrim; and that of the middle, to that of the Supreme: or if there were onely two, that of the le&s;&s;er Sanedrim unto that of the great one; as has been proved by Mr. <HI>Rutherford, Gilli&s;py, Hearl,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Art.</HI> 1. and 2.</P>
<P N="3">3. The Repre&s;entative Church, or fir&s;t Generall Councell, at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> had Power and Authority over all the Churches of the world; &s;ince it gave them a Mini&s;ter, <HI>viz. Mathias: Ergo,</HI> All other Churches in their Iudgements and Power of creating &s;uch a Mini&s;ter, were &s;ubject unto it.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> If it be &s;aid, That it was an <HI>extraordinary Councell,</HI> 1. Becau&s;e it was indicted and convocated by Chri&s;t; 2. Becau&s;e it was compounded of extraordinary Per&s;ons; 3. Becau&s;e the Per&s;ons received extraordinary gifts there; 4. Becau&s;e, it was in the birth and beginning of the Church.</P>
<P><HI>Reply.</HI> The Scripture &s;aith not, That it was <HI>Extraordinary.</HI> As for the the Proofs; I an&s;wer to the fir&s;t, 1. That howbeit it was <HI>indicted</HI> and <HI>convo|cated</HI> by Chri&s;t, yet was it not indicted and convocated in an <HI>extraordinary way.</HI> 2. That a Councell may be extraordinarily indicted and convocated, and yet be ordinary in its proceedings. 3. That the Indiction and Convocation of a Councell is Extrin&s;ecall, and Antecedent to a Councell; becau&s;e that it is before that the Councell be; and therefore cannot make it Intrin&s;ecally extra|ordinary
<PB N="79" REF="45">when it is exi&s;tent: So, <HI>Adam</HI> was made in an extraordinary way of Earth, and by creation; and <HI>Eva</HI> of <HI>Adams</HI> Rib; and yet they were not extra|ordinary per&s;ons, in their nature, exi&s;tence, con&s;ervation, or accidents. 4. Nei|ther read we, that it was convocated in an extraordinary way. 5. Neither can it be extraordinary, becau&s;e it was convocated by Chri&s;t; for by the &s;ame rea|&s;on, all that ever Chri&s;t did to men, &s;hould have been extraordinary.</P>
<P>To the &s;econd, I have already an&s;wered.</P>
<P>To the third, I an&s;wer, 1. That the extraordinary gifts were <HI>per&s;onall</HI> only, and belonged unto the materiall parts of the Councell, and not to the form thereof; and therefore could not make it formally extraordinary, in quality of a Councell; for formall denominations are not taken from the matter, but from the form; &s;o, if there be &s;ix or &s;even Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall per&s;ons a&s;&s;embled to dine|together, we call it not an Eccle&s;ia&s;tical A&s;&s;embly. 2. I an&s;wer, That the&s;e extra ordinary gifts were &s;ub&s;equent unto the Councell, or at lea&s;t to that Eccle&s;ia|&s;ticall proceeding, in the election of <HI>Mathias;</HI> Now that, which is &s;ub&s;equent to any thing, cannot denominate it formally, or at lea&s;t in the time precedent; when the Subject precedeth &s;uch a &s;ub&s;equent Adjunct or Circum&s;tance. See more concerning this Argument heretofore.</P>
<P>To the fourth, I an&s;wer, 1. That all that, which was in the birth and infan|cie of the Church, was not <HI>Extraordinary;</HI> for by that rea&s;on, the Preaching of the Go&s;pel, and the Admini&s;tration of the Sacraments &s;hould have been Ex|traordinary. 2. Things, that are Ordinary, mu&s;t have a beginning. 3. And how&s;oever, at their beginning, they be Extraordinary in re&s;pect of time, be|cau&s;e, before their beginning, they were not Ordinary, but out of the prece|dent order; yet they are Ordinary, in re&s;pect of Gods Ordinance or Law, which is <HI>ordinatio rationis,</HI> that &s;hould be ordinary in Gods Church.</P>
<P><HI>Object.</HI> If it be yet &s;aid, That <HI>Mathias</HI> was an <HI>Extraordinary Mini&s;ter,</HI> and his <HI>Vocation Extraordinary.</HI></P>
<P>I an&s;wer, That all that is true; and yet, in this <HI>Extraordinary Vocation,</HI> there was &s;omething <HI>Ordinary, viz.</HI> The <HI>Nomination,</HI> and <HI>Election,</HI> or <HI>Admittance</HI> of him to be a <HI>Mini&s;ter</HI> of the Church, according to the Independents opinion, otherwayes their Argument &s;hould be very impertinent, in proving from hence, the power of the people, in choo&s;ing their Mini&s;ters. That which there was <HI>Extraordinary,</HI> was not done by the Councell, and therefore could not make the Councell <HI>Extraordinary.</HI></P>
<P>As much may be &s;aid of that Councell, that created &s;even Deacons for ma|ny Churches.</P>
<P N="5">5. But principally we will urge that bu&s;ine&s;&s;e of <HI>Antioch,</HI> in that difference betwixt St. <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas,</HI> on the one part, and &s;ome <HI>Phari&s;ees</HI> convert|ed to the Chri&s;tian Faith, on the other. Hereupon it was re&s;olved that <HI>Paul and Barnabas &s;hould go up to Jern&s;alem, unto the Apo&s;tles and Elders, about that que&s;tion,</HI> v. 2. they were <HI>&s;ent</HI> by the Church of <HI>Antioch,</HI> v. 3. they were received
<PB N="80" REF="46">by the Church, and by the Apo&s;tles and Elders of the Church at <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> v. 4 the <HI>A&s;&s;embly being gathered at Jeru&s;alem,</HI> the Cau&s;e was heard, v. 4.5. con&s;i|dered, v. 6. di&s;cu&s;&s;ed, v. 7. voyced, v. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21 judged, v. 22. the <HI>Iudgement,</HI> or <HI>Decree</HI> of the <HI>Councell</HI> or <HI>A&s;&s;embly, &s;ent</HI> to <HI>Antioch,</HI> from the 22. v. to the 30. <HI>read,</HI> and <HI>obeyed</HI> by the <HI>Church</HI> at <HI>Antioch,</HI> &amp;c. v. 31. Here is the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Antioch, judged by a &s;uperiour Church,</HI> at <HI>Ieru&s;alem;</HI> an <HI>Appeal,</HI> formed or interjected, from the one to the other; <HI>re|ceived</HI> by the other; <HI>judged</HI> and <HI>obeyed:</HI> And therefore it cannot be denyed, but there was &s;ome <HI>Subordination</HI> betwixt the&s;e <HI>two Churches,</HI> and that the one had authority over the other.</P>
<P>To this Argument &s;ome an&s;wer, 1. That if it prove any thing, it can only conclude an <HI>Appeal</HI> from one <HI>Pari&s;h Church,</HI> or particular Congregation un|to another, &s;ince the Church of <HI>Antioch,</HI> and of <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> were no other then Pari&s;h Churches.</P>
<P><HI>Rep.</HI> 1. This An&s;wer cannot hold, 1. Becau&s;e no &s;uch thing can probably be collected out of this Text, or of any other in Scripture; and therefore it may be as ea&s;ily rejected by us, as it is alleadged by them. 2. Becau&s;e hardly can it be proved, that in tho&s;e times <HI>Churches</HI> were divided into <HI>Pari&s;hes.</HI> 3. Becau&s;e an <HI>Appeale</HI> cannot be from one <HI>Pari&s;h</HI> or <HI>Congregationall Church</HI> unto another, &s;ince their authority is equall; but only from an inferior to a &s;uperior Church or Judicatory. 4. Becau&s;e if it was from one particular Con|gregation to another, then that Congregation, from which it was appealed, was not compleat in its Judgement, but had need of &s;ome Extrin&s;ecall power, which is again&s;t the Tenets of Independents them&s;elves. 5. Becau&s;e if we might appeale from one particular Congregation to another, how much more from a particular Congregation unto a Synod, wherein the Spirit of God, and e&s;pecially that of Prophecie doth more abound. 6. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tles in <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> were not members of any particular Church. 7. Becau&s;e, if the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> at <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> had been a <HI>particular</HI> or <HI>Congregationall</HI> Church, it could not have given out a <HI>Decree,</HI> which &s;hould have bound &s;o <HI>many Chur|ches</HI> to obedience, viz. tho&s;e of <HI>Antioch, Syria,</HI> and <HI>Cilicia,</HI> v. 23.</P>
<P N="2">2. It may be otherwayes an&s;wered, That it was an <HI>Appeale,</HI> but not to any <HI>Ordinary,</HI> but an <HI>Extraordinary</HI> Church, viz. to that of the <HI>Apo&s;tles;</HI> and that for the&s;e Rea&s;ons. 1. Becau&s;e it was Extraordinarily gathered; 2. By Extra|ordinary per&s;ons; 3. It was compounded of Extraordinary per&s;ons, viz. the Apo&s;tles; 4. Becau&s;e this Appeale was to the Apo&s;tles, who were infallible and Extraordinary Mini&s;ters; 5. Becau&s;e it was in the birth, and beginning of the Go&s;pel.</P>
<P><HI>Rep.</HI> 2. This An&s;wer cannot hold, 1. Becau&s;e the Scripture declareth not, that this <HI>Church</HI> or <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> was <HI>Extraordinary.</HI> 2. Neither is it a &s;atisfactory An&s;wer, whenever we bring pa&s;&s;ages of Scripture to prove our Opinion, that they an&s;wer us, that they are of Extraordinary things, and practi&s;es; unle&s;&s;e
<PB N="81" REF="46">the Scripture <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters">clare them to be &s;uch, or that they go beyond the generall Rules commanded in Scripture. 3. Becau&s;e here the proceedings are con|forme to tho&s;e, that we have in other Scriptures, as in the Old Te&s;tament &amp;c. As for the Rea&s;ons; to the fir&s;t I an&s;wer, that it cannot be proved, that it was extraordinarily gathered. 2. And howbeit it had been extraordinarily ga|thered, yet the proceedings therein might have been, and were ordinary. 3. Becau&s;e the gathering or indicting of an A&s;&s;embly is Extrin&s;ecall unto an A&s;&s;embly, and antecedent to it, and therefore cannot make it Intrin&s;ecally extraordinary in its proceedings. 4. It is onely circum&s;tantiall, which can|not make it extraordinary, <HI>quoad &s;ub&s;tantiam, &s;ed quoad modum,</HI> and that <HI>modus</HI> al&s;o is Extrin&s;ecall; and not &s;o much a manner of being of the A&s;&s;em|bly, as of him, or them, who indict, or gather it.</P>
<P>To the 2. <HI>Extraordinary Per&s;ons,</HI> who gather an <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> are not &s;uffici|ent to make an <HI>A&s;&s;embly extraordinary.</HI> 1. For then <HI>all</HI> the <HI>Churches</HI> ga|thered by the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> had been <HI>extraordinary,</HI> which is mo&s;t fal&s;e. 2. If they made it <HI>extraordinary,</HI> they mu&s;t have imparted unto it &s;ome <HI>extraordinary quality,</HI> which they did not, or at lea&s;t, which appeareth not from Scripture; and &s;o it mu&s;t be holden as if it were not; for Scripture is onely a Rule to us in that which it &s;ayeth, and not in that which it &s;ayeth not.</P>
<P>To the 3. Becau&s;e it was compounded of <HI>extraordinary Per&s;ons,</HI> viz. <HI>Apo&s;tles.</HI></P>
<P>This an&s;wer &s;atisfieth not the Argument. 1. It is ridiculous to call all <HI>ex|traordinary,</HI> that maketh again&s;t them. 2. Becau&s;e it was not compounded of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> alone, but al&s;o of the <HI>Elders,</HI> ver&s;. 2.3. 3. Becau&s;e not onely the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> but al&s;o the <HI>Elders judged</HI> the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, v. 2.3. 4. Howbeit this <HI>Appeale</HI> was to the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> yet was it not to them in quality of Apo&s;tles, nei|ther are we bound to beleeve it, &s;ince the Scripture hath no &s;uch thing of it. 5. If it had been to the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> in quality of <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> or men, who were <HI>in|fallible,</HI> then could they not have <HI>appealed</HI> from <HI>Paul</HI> at <HI>Antioch,</HI> to the <HI>A|po&s;tles</HI> at <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> &s;ince he was as <HI>infallible</HI> at <HI>Antioch,</HI> as they all at <HI>Jeru|&s;alem.</HI> 6. The <HI>judgement</HI> of the <HI>Elders</HI> had been <HI>&s;uperfluous;</HI> for the <HI>judgement</HI> of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> alone, and their <HI>Letter</HI> alone, had &s;ufficed as <HI>Canonicall Scrip|ture,</HI> to direct them at <HI>Antioch</HI> in their Proceedings: What needed they adde a <HI>fallible judgement</HI> to that, that was <HI>infallible,</HI> or mans judgement to Gods? and yet they contented not them&s;elves with that of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> alone. 7. If this A&s;&s;embly at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> had been <HI>extraordinary,</HI> and <HI>infallible,</HI> becau&s;e it was compounded of <HI>extraordinary Per&s;ons,</HI> viz. of <HI>Apo&s;tles. Ergo.</HI> &s;o was that of <HI>Antioch,</HI> becau&s;e there was St. <HI>Paul</HI> an <HI>Apo&s;tle.</HI> 8. By the &s;ame rea|&s;on, it mu&s;t have been ordinary and fallible, becau&s;e it was compounded of <HI>or|dinary</HI> and <HI>fallible</HI> per&s;ons, viz. the <HI>Elders.</HI> 9. If the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> had been there in quality of <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and <HI>infallible Mini&s;ters,</HI> what needed they &s;o long to con&s;ult and di&s;pute in the A&s;&s;embly, v. 10? A &s;imple Deci&s;ion, without any
<PB N="82" REF="47">Con&s;ultation might have &s;ufficed; for <HI>Di&s;putes</HI> and <HI>Con&s;ultatio<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters"></HI> among&s;t men, are not of things, which they hold altogether certain, and out of doubt, but of things uncertain and doubtfull. 10. I deny the Con&s;equence, viz. That if a <HI>Councell</HI> or <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> be compounded of <HI>extraordinary</HI> Per&s;ons, <HI>Ergo,</HI> it is <HI>ex|traordinary;</HI> for by the &s;ame rea&s;on, if there were &s;even, or eight <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> dine|ing or &s;leeping together, it &s;hould be an <HI>extraordinary</HI> and <HI>Apo&s;toli|call</HI> dinner or &s;leeping. 11. Neither are all <HI>things,</HI> that are done by <HI>extraordinary Per&s;ons, extraordinary;</HI> for the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> did <HI>eate, drinke,</HI> and <HI>&s;leepe,</HI> neither yet was that <HI>Extraordinary Eating, Drinking, or Sleeeping,</HI> but ordinary, as in other men. 12. Becau&s;e the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> were materiall parts, or members of the <HI>A&s;&s;embly;</HI> their gifts, as <HI>infallibility</HI> and offices were per&s;onall, and denominated them&s;elves onely, and not every A&s;&s;embly, where|in they were, or might be, for as the Forme that denominateth their per&s;ons, belongeth onely to them, &s;o doth the denomination proceeding from it. 13. Becau&s;e the parts of A&s;&s;emblyes and Con&s;ociations, may have contrary Formes and denominations, <HI>&s;ecundum entiatem,</HI> as we &s;ee in <HI>Republicks;</HI> for the whole <HI>Republick</HI> may be <HI>rich</HI> and <HI>potent,</HI> and the <HI>members</HI> thereof very <HI>poore,</HI> becau&s;e of the great <HI>Tributes</HI> they pay to the <HI>State,</HI> and the <HI>Statepoor;</HI> and the <HI>members</HI> or <HI>Subjects rich;</HI> becau&s;e of the <HI>Subjects great Trading and profit,</HI> and their &s;mall <HI>Contributions</HI> to the <HI>State;</HI> So in the <HI>Church,</HI> in an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call</HI> A&s;&s;embly of Prophets, as that of <HI>Achab,</HI> there may be one Prophet <HI>in|fallible,</HI> yea, if there had been 400. yet that Councell had been; as it was, <HI>fallible,</HI> becau&s;e of the Plurality of the votes of the fal&s;e Prophets; &s;o an Army of 40000000. of Pigmees and Dwarfs is a great Army, and every one of them a little man.</P>
<P>To the 3. I have already an&s;wered.</P>
<P>To the 4. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. It was not to the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> in quality of Apo&s;tles, as I have proved it. 2. Becau&s;e it was al&s;o to the Elders. 3. I deny the con&s;e|quence; for by the &s;ame rea&s;on it &s;hould be <HI>ordinary,</HI> &s;ince it was to the Elders, who were ordinary Mini&s;ters.</P>
<P>To the 5. 1. I deny the con&s;equence, for all things that were in the begining of the Church were not extraordinary, &s;ince many of them continue now as <HI>ordinary.</HI> 2. Becau&s;e if it be <HI>extraordinary,</HI> becau&s;e it was in the <HI>beginning</HI> of the Church, <HI>Ergo,</HI> all that we have in Chri&s;tian Religion mu&s;t be Extraordi|nary, &s;ince there is no thing in it, but it had a Beginning: &s;o Faith, Ju&s;tificati|on, the Sacraments and all the Ordinary Mini&s;ters of the Church &s;hould be extraordinary, &s;ince they have a beginning with the Church. 3. Howbeit it was Extraordinary in re&s;pect of Time, as all things at their fir&s;t Beginning, yet was it not Extraordinary in re&s;pect of Gods Law, which ordains it to be ordinary.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 3. This Argument may be other wayes eluded, in &s;aying, that this bu&s;ine&s;&s;e was not judged at <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> by way of Appeale, but by way of Councell, not by Judges, but by Friends, and Brethren.</P>
<PB N="83" REF="47">
<P><HI>Rep.</HI> But this <HI>Eva&s;ton</HI> is no better then the re&s;t; 1. Becau&s;e the Text con|teineth no &s;uch thing; and we cannot take it upon their word, no more then they will take it upon ours, unle&s;&s;e we prove it, as we here doe. 2. Becau&s;e heretofore we have &s;hewn many, yea almo&s;t all the conditions nece&s;&s;ary to an <HI>Appeale,</HI> whereof the re&s;t may be inferred by nece&s;&s;ary con&s;equence. 3. Be|cau&s;e <HI>S. James</HI> (who as &s;ome Divines conceive, was the <HI>Moderator</HI> or <HI>Prae&s;es</HI> of the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI>) &s;aith not, <HI>My Coun&s;ell is,</HI> but <HI>My Sentence is;</HI> which is not the &s;tile of a <HI>Coun&s;ellour</HI> to a friend, but of a <HI>Judge.</HI> 4. The <HI>Judgement</HI> in the Text is called a <HI>Decree.</HI> 5. If it had been but a <HI>Councell,</HI> the Phari&s;ees might as well, yea more ea&s;ily have rejected it, then the <HI>Iudgement</HI> at <HI>Antioch,</HI> which they did not, but acquie&s;ced therein, for any thing we know to the contrary. 6. Some may peradventure prove it in this manner; That, if it had not been a <HI>Synod,</HI> and a &s;uperior Iudicatory in re&s;pect of <HI>Antioch,</HI> tho&s;e of <HI>Antioch</HI> had not &s;ent the <HI>two Parties,</HI> but had done better, to have &s;ent &s;ome <HI>indifferent Per|&s;on;</HI> for <HI>indifferent Per&s;ons</HI> are more proper to con&s;ult a bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, then the <HI>Parties.</HI> 7. If it had been <HI>judged</HI> at Hieru&s;alem by way of <HI>Coun&s;ell</HI> only, this <HI>Coun&s;ell</HI> had likely been only given to the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Antioch;</HI> for <HI>coun&s;ell</HI> ordinarily is only given to tho&s;e, who de&s;ire and crave it: But &s;o it is not here, for the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> not only <HI>judged</HI> &s;o concerning the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Antioch</HI> alone, but al&s;o of <HI>all others;</HI> and the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and their <HI>Di&s;ciples urged</HI> this <HI>Iudgement</HI> upon all the re&s;t of the <HI>Churches,</HI> where they pa&s;&s;ed.</P>
<P>Some <HI>New-England</HI> Preachers an&s;wer, That this <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> at Hieru&s;alem <HI>cleer up the truth dogmatically;</HI> for the word tran&s;lated <HI>Decrees,</HI> is in the Ori|ginall <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>Act.</HI> 16.4. but imports not to <HI>Cen&s;ure.</HI> Item, that they cannot &s;ee, why the <HI>ultimate power</HI> of <HI>Cen&s;ures</HI> may not re&s;ide in the <HI>Congregation,</HI> as well as in the <HI>Synod</HI> Provinciall, Nationall, or Oecumenicall.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> This cannot hold, 1. For whoever have a <HI>Dogmaticall power,</HI> they have al&s;o a power to <HI>Cen&s;ure;</HI> for he who may <HI>judge,</HI> that this mu&s;t be believed, and according to Gods Word, meriteth &s;uch an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall or Spirituall puni&s;hment, wherefore may he not al&s;o &s;entence the <HI>Delinquents,</HI> who merit to be &s;o <HI>cen&s;ured?</HI> 2. Becau&s;e, in giving a <HI>Dogmaticall power</HI> to &s;ome, and a <HI>Corrective power</HI> unto others, they divide the <HI>Keyes,</HI> and give one unto one <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> and another unto another, and &s;o make one <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> &s;ee with the others eyes. 3. The&s;e <HI>Powers</HI> were not &s;eparated in the Church, or Church-A&s;&s;emblies in the Old Te&s;tament, <HI>Ergo,</HI> No more &s;hould they be &s;e|parated in the New, &s;ince the union of the&s;e <HI>two Powers</HI> proceeds not from any <HI>Ceremoniall Law,</HI> but either from the <HI>Law</HI> of <HI>Nature,</HI> or the <HI>Politicall Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Law,</HI> in &s;o far forth as grounded on the <HI>Law</HI> of <HI>Nature.</HI> 4. Be|cau&s;e &s;uch a way were, as <HI>M.S.</HI> &s;peaketh, to make the one <HI>Iudex,</HI> and the o|ther <HI>Carni&s;ex,</HI> the one to be the <HI>Iudge,</HI> and the other the <HI>Executioner,</HI> 5. Be|cau&s;e in all States, and Civill Governments, <HI>Iudges,</HI> or <HI>Senates,</HI> who have the <HI>Dogmaticall power,</HI> have al&s;o the <HI>Corrective</HI> or <HI>Coercive power;</HI> and there is
<PB N="84" REF="48">the &s;ame rea&s;on for both. 6. The Text conteineth no &s;uch thing; neither can they &s;hew us in any part of Scripture any ground for any &s;uch divi&s;ion of the&s;e two Powers; Neither can that &s;illy Grammaticall ob&s;ervation of the word <GAP DESC="foreign"> &s;erve them; for the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> &s;erveth not him&s;elfe of this word in the whole latitude of all its <HI>Grammaticall &s;ignifications,</HI> that it may have according to its Etymologie and Derivation; but in a <HI>Legall way,</HI> as it is ta|ken in <HI>Law,</HI> for <HI>Placitum, Statutum, In&s;titutum, Decretum, Edictum,</HI> as in the <HI>Civill Lawes,</HI> wherein the&s;e words &s;ignifie <HI>Lawes,</HI> or <HI>Ordi|nances:</HI> and <HI>Calvin</HI> telleth us, <HI>in Lexico Iuridico,</HI> that <HI>Dogma, e&s;t lex docens &s;ci|entiam fidei, l.</HI> 2. <HI>F. F. ad Senatus-con. Vellejan Decretum: &amp; Senatus-con&s;ultum &s;ignificat, pro quo Mode&s;tinus</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>F. F. de excu&s;.</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign"> <HI>dixit:</HI> Now <GAP DESC="foreign"> is nothing el&s;e, but <HI>Decretum, Scitum, Plebi&s;citum.</HI> The cau&s;e wherefore the Apo&s;tle taketh it in a <HI>Court,</HI> or <HI>Law</HI>-&s;ignification, is, becau&s;e that they were making <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Lawes,</HI> and &s;o took it <HI>ratione &s;ubjectae materiae.</HI> 7. And this may be confirmed, becau&s;e they are not only called <HI>dogmata,</HI> but it is ad|ded <GAP DESC="foreign"> in the Text, i. e. <HI>quae decreta fuerunt ab Apo&s;tolis,</HI> that were de|creed by the Apo&s;tles. 8. And what el&s;e is <GAP DESC="foreign">, but to <HI>dogmatize,</HI> or to bring in a new Opinion, Cu&s;tome, or Ceremony, <HI>Col.</HI> 2.20. which here was not done by any private man, but by authority of a Councell. 9. Neither can the Authors of this Eva&s;ion ever &s;hew us, that <HI>Dogma,</HI> in <HI>Law,</HI> is taken for a <HI>power</HI> meerly <HI>dogmaticall,</HI> &s;eparated from all <HI>coercive</HI> or <HI>corrective power.</HI> And moreover, if this will not &s;atisfie them, we have, <HI>Act.</HI> 15. v. 24. <HI>To whom we commanded no &s;uch thing;</HI> Ergo, Tho&s;e of <HI>Antioch</HI> &s;uppo&s;ed, that that <HI>Councell</HI> at Hieru&s;alem had power to <HI>command;</HI> and the <HI>Councell</HI> denieth not that they had <HI>Power</HI> to <HI>command,</HI> but the <HI>Act</HI> of the <HI>Power,</HI> viz. that they had commanded any &s;uch thing; v. 28. <HI>It &s;eemed good to the Holy Gho&s;t, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden, then the&s;e nece&s;&s;ary things; Ergo,</HI> they laid a <HI>burden,</HI> but no greater burden upon them. 2. It was <HI>laid</HI> upon them. 3. It was <HI>nece&s;&s;ary, nece&s;&s;itate praecepti:</HI> But they, who had &s;uch a <HI>power,</HI> had they not, think we, power al&s;o to <HI>cen&s;ure.</HI> 12. <HI>Beza</HI> telleth us al&s;o, that in his <HI>Co|dex,</HI> in chap. 15. v. 41. this is added, <GAP DESC="foreign">, as in &s;ome Latine codex, <HI>Praecipiens cu&s;todire praecepta Apo&s;tolorum &amp; Seniorum;</HI> which argueth, that they had not only a Directive, but al&s;o an Imperative power over the Churches, in vertue of that <HI>Decree</HI> of the <HI>Councell.</HI> 13. The Dogmaticall power is like unto the Legi&s;lative power, and whoever hath a Legi&s;lative power, hath al&s;o a Corrective power. 14. This <HI>Councell</HI> had not only a Dogmaticall, but al&s;o a Legi&s;lative power about things of them&s;elves <HI>indifferent,</HI> as appeareth here, in making a <HI>Law,</HI> that the Chri&s;tians &s;hould <HI>ab&s;taine from meats offered to Idols, and from blood, and from things &s;trangled.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. Some (it may be) will finde out this Eva&s;ion, and &s;ay, That it was not a Councell, nor an ordinary Decree of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudges, but of Arbiters.</P>
<PB N="85" REF="48">
<P><HI>Rep.</HI> But 1. the Text hath no &s;uch thing. 2. Arbiters are either given by the ordinary Iudge, ordinarily called <HI>Iudices pedanei;</HI> or cho&s;en by the Parties them&s;elves, otherwayes called <HI>Compromi&s;&s;arii:</HI> If ye grant me the fir&s;t, then particular Churches are &s;ubject unto Superiour Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudica|tories, that give them &s;uch Arbiters, which is all we look for: If the &s;econd, then if the Word of God hath granted an Independent liberty unto the Church, &s;he ought not to quit it, in making her &s;elf &s;ubject and dependent; for we cannot di&s;po&s;e of our own liberty, granted to us by Chri&s;t, to make our &s;elves &s;ervants, or &s;ubject to men in Matters of Religion. 3. We can|not &s;ubmit Gods Cau&s;e to others, then to whom he hath &s;ubmitted it him&s;elf. How could they accept them for Iudges, who had no vocation of God to judge them?</P>
<P N="5">5. <HI>Arbitrary Iudges,</HI> that are given, have a <HI>Superiour power</HI> over the <HI>Church,</HI> that they <HI>judge;</HI> and &s;o ye acknowledge, that the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Ieru|&s;alem</HI> had <HI>power</HI> over that of <HI>Antioch,</HI> if that of <HI>Ieru&s;alem</HI> was an <HI>Arbiter datus aut delegatus.</HI> 2. The&s;e given <HI>Arbiters</HI> are given by a <HI>Iudge</HI> or <HI>Su|periour: Ergo,</HI> They pre&s;uppo&s;e &s;ome <HI>Superiour Iudge</HI> over the <HI>Partie judged.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. The <HI>Compromi&s;&s;ory Arbiter judgeth</HI> not according to the <HI>Law,</HI> but accord|ing to <HI>equity:</HI> but in all <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall judgements,</HI> he that <HI>judgeth</HI> mu&s;t <HI>judge,</HI> according to the <HI>Law,</HI> or <HI>Gods Word. Ergo,</HI> He that <HI>judgeth</HI> in <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall judgements</HI> cannot be a <HI>Compromi&s;&s;ory Arbiter,</HI> who onely properly is an <HI>Arbiter,</HI> in &s;o far as an <HI>Arbiter</HI> is di&s;tingui&s;hed from a Iudge.</P>
<P N="7">7. The Iudgement of a <HI>Compromi&s;&s;ory Arbiter</HI> cannot hold, nor <HI>oblige</HI> me to <HI>obedience,</HI> &s;ince it is not grounded on <HI>publike Authority,</HI> but on the <HI>will</HI> of the <HI>Parties,</HI> who, <HI>qua tales,</HI> are private <HI>per&s;ons;</HI> But the <HI>judgement</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> can, and mu&s;t hold, and <HI>oblige</HI> all the Churches of that time to <HI>obedience,</HI> according to that which the Councell intended, by the Iudgement.</P>
<P N="8">8. <HI>Compromi&s;&s;ory Arbiters</HI> onely <HI>judge</HI> of the <HI>Parties,</HI> which <HI>compromi&s;e</HI> to <HI>&s;ubmit</HI> them&s;elves to their <HI>judgement:</HI> But the <HI>Church, Apo&s;tles,</HI> and <HI>Pres|byters</HI> at <HI>Jeru&s;alem judged,</HI> not onely of the <HI>Parties</HI> that <HI>compromi&s;&s;ed</HI> to <HI>&s;ub|mit</HI> unto them, but of all the Churches, as the Text telleth us.</P>
<P N="9">9. In <HI>Arbitrary judgements</HI> ordinarily, they are the <HI>Parties</HI> that make choice of their <HI>Arbiters,</HI> and not a third, that ordaineth them, as the Church of <HI>Antioch</HI> did in this Ca&s;e, in &s;ending this <HI>Me&s;&s;age</HI> or <HI>Amba&s;&s;age</HI> to <HI>Ieru&s;alem.</HI></P>
<P N="10">10. Whether it was an <HI>extraordinary Coun&s;ell,</HI> or <HI>judgement</HI> of <HI>Arbiters;</HI> yet followeth it not, that &s;uch <HI>judgements</HI> of them&s;elves are ill, or again&s;t <HI>Gods Word;</HI> &s;ince God never <HI>ordained,</HI> nor the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> ever made choice of any <HI>breach</HI> of <HI>Gods Law,</HI> or of any <HI>di&s;order,</HI> to e&s;tabli&s;h any <HI>order</HI> in his Church by; for God needeth not the <HI>Devils</HI> help to do his Work; he can do it him&s;elf without him.</P>
<PB N="86" REF="49">
<P N="11">11. If they were <HI>Compromi&s;&s;orii Iudices,</HI> then <HI>particular</HI> or <HI>Pari&s;hionall Congregations</HI> may <HI>combine</HI> them&s;elves together in a <HI>con&s;ociation,</HI> and give <HI>power</HI> to <HI>Cla&s;&s;es,</HI> and to <HI>Synods,</HI> to be their <HI>Iudges,</HI> which is the practice of all the Reformed Churches.</P>
<P N="5">5. It may yet be an&s;wered, That in all this <HI>proceeding,</HI> there was no <HI>Refe|rence</HI> or <HI>Appeal,</HI> no <HI>Arbitrary judgement,</HI> nor any <HI>Coun&s;ell</HI> concerning the Church of <HI>Antioch;</HI> but onely an <HI>examen</HI> of a <HI>Me&s;&s;age,</HI> &s;ent or pretended to have been &s;ent from <HI>Jeru&s;alem, viz.</HI> Of &s;ome <HI>Phari&s;ees,</HI> Members of the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> who pretended to have had charge from the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> to urge the <HI>Circumci&s;ion,</HI> and the <HI>Ob&s;ervation</HI> of the <HI>Ceremoniall Law,</HI> as may be collected from <HI>ver&s;e</HI> 24.</P>
<P><HI>Rep.</HI> 1. This is not true, 1. Becau&s;e all this is &s;aid without Scripture. 2. And <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 24. it is not &s;aid, That the&s;e <HI>Phari&s;ees</HI> pretended to have had any &s;uch charge from the <HI>Apo&s;tles;</HI> but the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> &s;ay, That they gave them no &s;uch command: But this Argument may &s;eem &s;omewhat weak; for how&s;oever the Text have it not <HI>in terminis,</HI> yet &s;eems it to follow of the Text by a <HI>Morall nece&s;&s;ity;</HI> for that expre&s;&s;ion, <HI>To whom we gave no &s;uch commandment,</HI> &s;eemeth to pre&s;uppo&s;e &s;ome pretention of a <HI>commandment</HI> on the <HI>Phari&s;ees</HI> part. 3. And howbeit it is &s;aid, That they went out from the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> yet is it not &s;aid, they were Members of the Church of <HI>Ieru&s;alem.</HI> 4. Neither read we, That there was any di&s;pute about their <HI>Me&s;&s;age,</HI> or <HI>Commi&s;&s;ion,</HI> but about their <HI>Doctrine.</HI> 5. Becau&s;e the <HI>Sentence</HI> or <HI>Decree</HI> is onely about their <HI>Doctrine.</HI> 6. Becau&s;e in that <HI>Decree,</HI> not onely the <HI>Phari&s;ees</HI> are &s;entenced, but all the <HI>Churches;</HI> up|on which the Ob&s;ervation of the <HI>Canons</HI> of the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> is enjoyned; onely there is a word, in pa&s;&s;ing, &s;aid of the <HI>Phari&s;ees;</HI> but however it be, that was no way the <HI>principall</HI> Que&s;tion.</P>
<P>Finally, here cometh in <HI>M. S.</HI> in an ordinary Independent way, never proving any thing Po&s;itively, that they beleeve (for in this point, they &s;hew them&s;elves the weake&s;t of all Sectaries) but ever more denying what we prove, which requires no great abilities, as is known and confe&s;&s;ed among&s;t all men, that do but pretend to learning; neither can they do otherwayes; for they will not be tyed in time to come to any Po&s;itive Doctrine, no not &s;o much as to that they hold at this pre&s;ent, for any thing I can collect from the <HI>Apologeticall Narration:</HI> onely they &s;tand &s;toutly to &s;ome <HI>Nego's,</HI> and will, that we prove all, and they nothing at all.</P>
<P>He telleth us then in the third Chapter of his Book, that before this Argu|ment of ours <HI>Acts</HI> 15. can hold, we have ten Particulars to prove; 1. That the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> &s;ate here in quality of <HI>Apo&s;tles.</HI> 2. That this <HI>Councell</HI> had their <HI>&s;tate</HI> and &s;et <HI>times</HI> of <HI>meeting.</HI> 3. That they had <HI>Authoritatem Citationis.</HI> 4. That the <HI>Members</HI> of this <HI>Synod</HI> were &s;ent hereunto by the <HI>particular Churches,</HI> over whom they claimed <HI>juri&s;diction.</HI> 5. That onely <HI>Church-men</HI> had <HI>power</HI> to <HI>&s;it</HI> there. 6. That it had as well <HI>power</HI> to make <HI>Laws</HI> of things
<PB N="87" REF="49"><HI>indifferent,</HI> as to impo&s;e things <HI>nece&s;&s;ary.</HI> 7. That the <HI>Churches of Syria,</HI> and <HI>Cilicia,</HI> had their <HI>Delegats &s;itting</HI> there. 8. That <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas &s;ate</HI> as <HI>Commi&s;&s;ioners,</HI> for the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Antioch.</HI> 9. That <HI>ordinary Synods</HI> may <HI>proceed,</HI> as they did, in &s;aying, <HI>It &s;eemed good,</HI> &amp;c. 10. That the&s;e <HI>words</HI> in the clo&s;e of the <HI>Epi&s;tle, ye &s;hall do well, ver&s;e</HI> 29. did import &s;ome <HI>intimation,</HI> That if they did not <HI>&s;ubmit,</HI> &s;ome <HI>further cour&s;e</HI> mu&s;t be taken with them. <HI>Item,</HI> In this Chapter he telleth us, That <HI>Presbyterians</HI> agree not about the Pedigree of their Government; and to tell us all this, he imployeth no le&s;&s;e, then ten Pages in Quarto in a very &s;mall Print.</P>
<P>As for the fir&s;t, we have already proved it &s;ufficiently, and attend his reply; As for that ridiculous demand of his, that we prove, That the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> waved and &s;ilenced the Spirit of Infallibility.</P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> They might have it, and not wave it, howbeit they &s;ate not there in quality of men that had it; for the Elders that had it not, &s;ate there in the &s;ame quality with them. Some di&s;pute al&s;o, 1. Whether the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> in all times, and in all places, and upon all occa&s;ions, yea, &s;leeping and &s;ick, had the gift of Infallibility in <HI>actu &s;ecundo,</HI> &s;o that their <HI>will</HI> could not hinder the Ex|ternall Act. See the Example of <HI>Nathan,</HI> S. <HI>Peter, Thomas, &amp;c.</HI> who had the gift of Infallibility in <HI>actu primo;</HI> but &s;undry times they had it not in <HI>actu &s;ecundo.</HI> 2. Some doubt al&s;o, what is the gift of Prophe&s;ie or Infallibility; Whether it be liker unto an Habitude, which is a Permanent quality, or to a Pa&s;&s;ion or Afflatus, which is not Permanent, but &s;uddenly flies away.</P>
<P>To the &s;econd: 1. It is but a circum&s;tance of time, which followeth nece&s;&s;a|rily of the &s;ub&s;tance of the thing. 1. For if Councells &s;it, they mu&s;t &s;it in &s;ome time; but in what time, whether once, twice, or thrice a yeer, that depends upon other Circum&s;tances, as of Church opportunities, and exigen|ces, of the Civill Magi&s;trates Permi&s;&s;ion, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 2. In things Circum&s;tantiall, Di&s;cipline depends on the Law of Nature according to the Apologi&s;ts own Confe&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P>To the third; It may be nece&s;&s;arily inferred of the Authoritative power; for where there is an Authoritative power to <HI>judge,</HI> and <HI>cen&s;ure,</HI> there is ever|more an Authoritative power of <HI>citation,</HI> and <HI>calling</HI> of all tho&s;e, who are within the compa&s;&s;e of &s;uch a juri&s;diction; for <HI>citation</HI> is a <HI>medium,</HI> whereby we come to <HI>judgement;</HI> and it is a maxime mo&s;t certain, that <HI>Media accipi|unt &s;uam nece&s;&s;itatem a fine; finis mediis conciliat amabilitatem.</HI></P>
<P>To the fourth; Some think it very probable, that <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> were &s;ent thither from <HI>Antiochia:</HI> but <HI>Paul</HI> was not Mini&s;ter of any particular Church; no more was <HI>Barnabas,</HI> for any thing we read in Scripture; and therefore appearingly, they could not be &s;ent from <HI>Antioch,</HI> a their particular Mini&s;ters; but &s;ince they were al&s;o Univer&s;all Mini&s;ters, they might receive a particular Commi&s;&s;ion from particular Churches, &s;ince the Apo&s;tolate, the charge of an Evangeli&s;t, and Prophet, contain in them&s;elves virtually the charges of ordinary Mini&s;ters.</P>
<PB N="88" REF="50">
<P>If it be &s;aid, That they were Party, and therefore could not &s;it as Judges; It may be an&s;wered, That men cannot be taken for Party, when they compear before the Synod; and when they are taken for Party by Innovators and Sectaries onely, and per&s;evere in the Doctrine already received in the Church; for if that were admitted, That every man promi&s;cuou&s;ly might be taken for Party, then might a Felon, or Traytor, take all his Judges for Party, and &s;o never be judged: and therefore in Iudgement, when any one will de|cline the Sentence of his Iudges, and take them for Party, his Rea&s;ons are examined and con&s;idered, whether they be of force and validity, or not. 2. It may be, that they were cho&s;en to be Members in the Synod, before that this di&s;pute fell out. 3. It is not needfull, that we prove all &s;ingular Circum|&s;tances from Scripture: It will &s;erve our turn if we prove, That it was &s;ome Occumenick, Nationall, or Provinciall Synod, from whence we may infer, by nece&s;&s;ary con&s;equence, that Commi&s;&s;ioners were &s;ent from particular Churches thereunto. Now whether S. <HI>Paul</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> were there in qua|lity of Commi&s;&s;ioners, it is not needfull to know. 4. This A&s;&s;embly was a Generall, or Nationall A&s;&s;embly, as we have proved: <HI>Ergo,</HI> Either it was a &s;et A&s;&s;embly, as the Popes Con&s;i&s;tory; or as a Chapter; or &s;uch as we have taken it for: But ye deny the fir&s;t two: <HI>Ergo,</HI> Ye mu&s;t grant the third, or give &s;ome other. 5. Ye your &s;elves admit Synods, to which particular Con|gregations &s;end their Commi&s;&s;ioners, Delegates, or Me&s;&s;engers, call them, as it plea&s;es you: <HI>Ergo,</HI> Ye cannot deny them; If ye deny their quality or power to judge, that is another que&s;tion, which is different from this.</P>
<P>To the fifth, I prove it, For no man hath power to judge in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Cau&s;es, but they who have the abilities, &s;uch as are onely Church Officers; becau&s;e no man can take this office, but he who is called, as <HI>Aaron;</HI> &s;uch as are not every one of the people; among&s;t whom, as ye &s;ay, many have not con|fidence enough, but are timorous, and others are rude or impertinent. If ye had an&s;wered all my Book, ye might have found more Rea&s;ons: but of this you are like to hear more, God willing, in a particular Que&s;tion.</P>
<P>To the &s;ixth, This Councell impo&s;ed upon the <HI>Church</HI> &s;ome things indiffe|rent of their own Nature, as that of ab&s;taining from blood, and things &s;trangled; for how&s;oever they were nece&s;&s;ary, <HI>nece&s;&s;itate praecepti,</HI> in &s;o far as commanded; yet were they not nece&s;&s;ary in them&s;elves, or <HI>nece&s;&s;itate medii;</HI> and &s;o they are called in the Text, <HI>things nece&s;&s;ary,</HI> partly <HI>nece&s;&s;itate praecepti,</HI> partly of conveniency, or remedy, for to avoide offence: Some call it <HI>nece&s;&s;i|tas non facti, &s;ed facientis,</HI> when the thing of it &s;elf is not needfull, but the Agent maketh it nece&s;&s;ary to him&s;elf, as we do, in ab&s;taining from things, whereat our Brethren may take offence, howbeit we give them none. 2. Your Independent Church taketh that Authority unto her &s;elf, as when &s;he ordains a certain day, and a certain hour, for her Sermons and meetings: Wherefore then may not a Synod do it? 3. The Church by Gods Authority,
<PB N="89" REF="50">may ordaine of things Nece&s;&s;ary; &s;o may &s;he of things Indifferent, when they may conduce to a thing that is nece&s;&s;ary; <HI>Nam media accipiunt nece&s;&s;i|tatem &agrave; fine.</HI> 4. For how&s;oever &s;ome things be indifferent in generall, yet are they not &s;uch in particular, in matter of Practice; for then they become nece&s;&s;ary, becau&s;e of &s;ome particular determinations, and references, that they have to &s;ome good ends, in re&s;pect of time, place, per&s;ons, &amp;c. 5. This is but one only Point of Presbyterian Government, and not all; and howbeit ye &s;hould gaine all this, (as ye doe not) yet would it not follow, that the Presbyterian Di&s;cipline were ab&s;olutely to be condemned.</P>
<P>To the 7. The Proofs of the 4. may prove this al&s;o. 1. For if it was a Pro|vinciall, Nationall, or Generall Synod or Councell, every Church concerned therein, mu&s;t have had their Commi&s;&s;ioners. 2. Ye your &s;elves acknow|ledge Synods to have a Synodicall authority, (howbeit, not as we) and there|unto ye &s;end your Me&s;&s;engers, as ye call them: and therefore, what right ye claime to &s;end your Me&s;&s;engers, the &s;ame had the Churches of <HI>Syria,</HI> and <HI>Cilicia,</HI> to &s;end theirs to <HI>Hieru&s;alem;</HI> but if they did it not, the more were they to blame for &s;uch neglect: Now it &s;ufficeth me, to prove that they had power, and were bound to &s;end their Commi&s;&s;ioners thither.</P>
<P>To the 8. I an&s;wer, 1. It is not needfull we prove, that <HI>Paul,</HI> and <HI>Barnabas</HI> were Commi&s;&s;ioners at <HI>Hieru&s;alem,</HI> for the Church of <HI>Antioch:</HI> It may be, that they were their Commi&s;&s;ioners; it may be, that they had &s;ome others. 2. It &s;ufficeth, that they had power to &s;end their Commi&s;&s;ioners thither, and were bound to doe it: And this bindeth them to &s;ubmit them&s;elves to their Decrees. 3. This Di&s;puter is ab&s;urd, whereas he will oblige us to prove every particular, yea individuall Circum&s;tance: It is a common Maxime, that, <HI>de &s;ingularibus non datur &s;cientia:</HI> The Scripture obligeth us not to know all the &s;ingular Circum&s;tances of every thing it propounds; but it delivereth us Do|cuments of all things nece&s;&s;ary unto Salvation, which either contain formally, or from whence may be concluded all that we are bound to know, either di|rectly, or indirectly, and <HI>per deductionem ad impo&s;&s;ibile,</HI> mediately or imme|diately.</P>
<P>To the 9. I an&s;wer, that every particular Mini&s;ter may preach, and admo|ni&s;h in the name of God; for they are all Amba&s;&s;adours of God: <HI>We are Am|ba&s;&s;adours for Chri&s;t, as though God did be&s;eech you by us; We pray you in Chri&s;ts &s;tead, be ye reconciled to God,</HI> 2 Cor. 5.20. It is al&s;o &s;aid, that <HI>the Lord did work with them,</HI> Mark. 16.20. and that they are <HI>co-operators, or labourers together with the Lord,</HI> 1 Cor. 3.9. Since therefore they are <HI>Gods co-operators,</HI> or <HI>labourers with the Lord,</HI> and the Lord with them, yea in their Deliberati|ons, Iudgements, and Preachings; wherefore may they not &s;ay, <HI>it &s;eemed good to the Holy Gho&s;t, and to us,</HI> viz. to the Holy Gho&s;t, as the prime cau&s;e, and to them, as to his Mini&s;ters and Amba&s;&s;adors; yea, if it &s;eemeth good to the Holy Gho&s;t, it &s;hould &s;eem good to all his Mini&s;ters. 2. And I pray you,
<PB N="90" REF="51"><HI>M.S.</HI> when it &s;eemeth good to an Independent Mini&s;ter to declare the Do|ctrine, that denieth Chri&s;ts Divinity, hereticall, whether think you, &s;eemes it not good to God, and to the Holy Gho&s;t al&s;o? and if it &s;eem good to both, why may not the Mini&s;ter &s;ay. It &s;eemeth good to God, and to me al&s;o, to declare this Hereticall? 3. And if that is bound, or loo&s;ed in Heaven, which the Church bindeth, or loo&s;eth on Earth; wherefore, when they bind, or loo&s;e &s;inners, may they not &s;ay, It &s;eemeth good to God, and to me al&s;o, to loo&s;e this &s;inner?</P>
<P>To the 10. I an&s;wer, It is altogether ridiculous; for, this one particular ex|pre&s;&s;ion conteineth not all the expre&s;&s;ions that are u&s;ed in Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudgements; the Church u&s;eth not evermore Comminations in her Iudge|ments, but again&s;t &s;uch as are di&s;obedient, and that after &s;undry Admoni|tions; Neither is every Iudgement or Law evermore expre&s;ly Penall, as ye might have learned both out of your Civill, and Canon Law.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="8" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VIII.</HI> Wherein the &s;ame Doctrine is further confirmed by Rea&s;on.</HEAD>
<P>THis Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories, may be likewi&s;e proved by the practice of the Old Te&s;tament; for in the Old Te&s;tament, there were Synagogicall and Synedriall Iudicatories; among&s;t them there was a Subordination, and from the fir&s;t they appealed to the &s;econd; neither find we ever, that God abrogated it, &s;ince it was not Ceremoniall, as I have &s;hewed.</P>
<P N="2">2. It may likewi&s;e be proved from the Subordination of Civill Iudicatories, in all great Civill States; and there is a like rea&s;on for them both.</P>
<P N="3">3. If it be granted, that there are Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies greater in Au|thority one then another, as appeareth by all the&s;e former Texts; either this inequality of Greatne&s;&s;e or Power is by <HI>Co-ordination,</HI> or by <HI>Subordination:</HI> But it cannot be by <HI>Co-ordination;</HI> for one co-ordinate Power hath no power over the other, as that of <HI>Hieru&s;alem</HI> had over the re&s;t of the Churches, in giving them a Pa&s;tor, <HI>Act.</HI> 1.2. &amp; 6. chap. and Lawes and Commands, <HI>Act.</HI> 15. &amp; 16. <HI>Ergo,</HI> It mu&s;t be by <HI>Subordination;</HI> And then the power of the &s;ubor|dinate Church is under that of the &s;uperior Church, whereunto it is &s;ubordi|nated, as in Civill Iudicatories, &s;ubordinated one to another.</P>
<P N="4">4. If there were no Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories, in matters of Power and Authority, or their Authoritative Power; then any particular Congregation, by an irre&s;i&s;tible power, in de&s;pite of all the Churches of the the World, might e&s;tabli&s;h among&s;t them&s;elves all &s;ort of mo&s;t damna|ble Here&s;ies, commit all &s;ort of &s;inne and uncleanne&s;&s;e, and &s;o infect all the World with their wickedne&s;&s;e, and no Churches, or Chri&s;tians, <HI>qua
<PB N="91" REF="51">tales,</HI> could hinder them, or &s;ay to them (even as the Pope pretends they cannot &s;ay to him) <HI>Domine, quare hoc facis?</HI></P>
<P N="5">5. But can our Adver&s;aries, ri&s;en up of the new, &s;hew any &s;uch Govern|ment as theirs in the Church of God, in any time, &s;ince Chri&s;ts Incarnation, yea, from the Creation of the World to this time, wherein there was no Subalternation, but a meer Independency among&s;t all Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudica|tories?</P>
<P>We could wi&s;h they would &s;hew us the In&s;titution of it in Scripture, where any where Chri&s;t commanded, that all Churches &s;hould be altogether Independent, and con&s;equently Incorrigible? Where at any time he granted them &s;uch a Licenciou&s;ne&s;&s;e of power to go irre&s;i&s;tably to Hell?</P>
<P>What an abominable Licenciou&s;ne&s;&s;e is this, to plead on this manner, for all &s;ort of Independency, and of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Impunity, in doing of all &s;ort of wickedne&s;&s;e and mi&s;chief.</P>
<P N="6">6. The want of this Subordination taketh away all &s;ort of remedy again&s;t the offences of particular Congregations.</P>
<P N="7">7. It de&s;troyeth the Unitie of the Militant vi&s;ible Church, both Provinciall, Nationall, and Univer&s;all; which cannot appear, but in a Provinciall, Nation|all, or Univer&s;all Synod, or Councell.</P>
<P N="8">8. And con&s;equently, the vi&s;ibility of the <HI>Church,</HI> for &s;he is not vi&s;ible, but in her Symbole or Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, and Canons of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Di&s;|cipline, as appeareth by the Symbole of the Apo&s;tles.</P>
<P N="9">9. To take away &s;uch Repre&s;entative Churches, as Synods, is to de&s;troy the Externall Church-Communion of Saints, or the Communion of Saints among&s;t divers Churches, which cannot &s;o well appear, as in Synods, where their <HI>Reall Communion</HI> one with another is be&s;t repre&s;ented; for if particular <HI>Churches</HI> be de&s;troyed by per&s;ecution, and a little remnant e&s;cape, as &s;ome|times it falleth out upon the <HI>Turks</HI> Inva&s;ion, and the Papi&s;ts Ma&s;&s;acres, as wofull experience hath furni&s;hed us but too many examples in <HI>Germany, France, England,</HI> and el&s;ewhere, what Externall Union or Communion of Saints can appear among&s;t you; &s;ince in &s;uch a ca&s;e ye will neither receive men in age to the Lords Table, nor the children of &s;uch Martyrs to Bapti&s;m; and &s;o all the recompence they can have among&s;t you for all their &s;ufferings for the Name of Chri&s;t, is, That they are like to be utterly excluded from all Church-Communion what&s;oever.</P>
<P N="10">10. So this is a very poor comfort for Martyrs, who having &s;uffered much in their own per&s;ons, lo&s;t their wives, children, and goods, for the good Name of Chri&s;t, &s;hall no more now be e&s;teemed Chri&s;tians after all their &s;ufferings, whereas they were thought to be of the very be&s;t before that time.</P>
<P N="11">11. Such a Subordination of <HI>Repre&s;entative Churches</HI> in matter of Govern|ment, is a means very nece&s;&s;ary to con&s;erve the <HI>Churches;</HI> for by the Autho|ritative
<PB N="92" REF="52">power thereof <HI>Churches</HI> are kept in Order, Unitie, and Union, and &s;o pre&s;erved, as we &s;ee in <HI>France, Holland, Scotland,</HI> and el&s;ewhere, ever &s;ince the beginning of the World; whereas by the contrary Inde|pendent way, con&s;i&s;ting of di&s;-union, they may ea&s;ily be de&s;troyed, as we &s;ee in the innumerable number of Sects, that in a &s;hort &s;pace of time have &s;prouted out of the Independent Sect; no le&s;&s;e oppo&s;ite one to another, then to us.</P>
<P N="12">12. If there be no Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies, but every one be Independent, and every member of the Church have a vote in all Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall matters, and be made acquainted with all that pa&s;&s;eth, as among&s;t the Independents; hardly can the Coun&s;els, and the Re&s;olutions, that are taken for mutuall con&s;ervation, be kept &s;ecret, but they will every houre be betrayed, and &s;o the Church given up to her Enemies: which appearingly cannot &s;o ea&s;ily fall out in the Synodicall way, wherein 20. 30. or 40. only, and tho&s;e of the be&s;t &s;ort, and the wi&s;e&s;t men, are acquainted with the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e: for, in all morall probability, it is not credible, but 20. 30. or 40. may better keep a bu&s;ine&s;&s;e &s;ecret, then 20000. or 30000, whereof the Churches that they repre&s;ent, may be compounded.</P>
<P N="13">13. Since Chri&s;t ordained Univer&s;all Mini&s;ters to rule over the whole Mi|litant Church, and all the particular Congregations thereof, wherefore &s;hould there not be &s;ome unity of Government among&s;t them? and wherefore may they not all depend on one Councell, as well as on one man? certainly, there is the &s;ame rea&s;on for both; for as the Apo&s;tles, under the notion of Apo&s;tles, and Church-Mini&s;ters, endowed with extraordinary gifts, and namely of Infallibility, governed the whole Church extraordinarily: &s;o doe Generall Councels, endowed with ordinary gifts, govern it ordinarily.</P>
<P N="14">14. I would willingly enquire of the Independents, to what Church were added &s;o many <HI>thou&s;ands,</HI> that were <HI>baptized</HI> by the <HI>Apo&s;tles,</HI> and <HI>added unto the Church in one day?</HI> Whether to a Particular Congregation, or to a grea|ter Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Con&s;ociation? It could not be to a Particular Congregation, 1. For the Rea&s;ons I have already produced. 2. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tles were not Particular, but Univer&s;all Mini&s;ters, &s;et over the Univer&s;all Militant Church; and therefore, in vertue of their charge, admitted them to be Mem|bers of all the Churches, whereof they were Mini&s;ters. 3. Becau&s;e they were of divers and &s;undry Countries: neither is it credible, that to be a <HI>Member</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> they were bound to quit their Countries, and to &s;tay at Hie|ru&s;alem, how&s;oever &s;o long as they did &s;tay there, they might participate as well of all the re&s;t of Gods Ordinances, as of Bapti&s;me: <HI>Ergo,</HI> they were added to &s;ome greater Con&s;ociation, viz. to that, and to all tho&s;e, whereof the Apo&s;tles were Mini&s;ters; for out of all doubt, the Apo&s;tles, who baptized them, could not refu&s;e to admit them unto the Lords Table, wherever they ce|lebrated the Sacrament.</P>
<PB N="93" REF="52">
<P>If it be an&s;wered, That this Argument only proveth a greater Reall, but not a greater Repre&s;entative Church.</P>
<P>I reply, That directly only it proveth a greater <HI>Reall,</HI> viz. an <HI>&V;niver&s;all Militant Church;</HI> but yet, by con&s;equence, it proveth al&s;o a <HI>Repre&s;entative Church</HI> of the &s;ame extent; for every <HI>Reall Church</HI> may be repre&s;ented in its <HI>Commi&s;&s;ioners,</HI> or <HI>Me&s;&s;engers</HI> (as ye call them) that meet in a <HI>Synod.</HI></P>
<P>If it be yet an&s;wered, that this may prove a greater Repre&s;entative Church, but not endowed with any <HI>Authoritative power.</HI></P>
<P>I reply, It is a power of Iudging, which mu&s;t be <HI>Authoritative,</HI> and can|not be meerly <HI>Con&s;ultative,</HI> &s;uch as is that of every Tinker, who may give coun&s;ell to a Church; and that of one Church, which hath power to give coun&s;ell to a thou&s;and, yea, to ten thou&s;and, repre&s;ented in a <HI>Synod;</HI> for par|ticular Churches, being parts of the whole Provinciall, Nationall, or Univer|&s;all Militant Church, mu&s;t be &s;ubject to the whole; for it is a <HI>Maxime</HI> in <HI>Philo&s;ophie,</HI> that <HI>Totum non &s;ubjicitur parti, &s;ed pars toti;</HI> Item, <HI>Totum non regitur motu partis, &s;ed Pars Totius:</HI> And they di&s;tingui&s;h between the Univer&s;all, and Particular Inclination of things, and tell us, That a <HI>part</HI> doth &s;ometimes quit its Particular Inclination, to be ruled according to the Incli|nation of the <HI>whole;</HI> as when <HI>water,</HI> which according to its Particular Incli|nation de&s;cends, yet to avoid the <HI>vacuum</HI> (whereof might en&s;ue the over|throw of the world) again&s;t its Particular Inclination, but according to its Univer&s;all Inclination, as it is for the Totall, it a&s;cends: And &s;o it is, or &s;hould be in Politicall, and all Spirituall Con&s;ociations; for the <HI>parts</HI> cannot be con&s;erved, but in the <HI>whole.</HI> The Politicians al&s;o tell us, that <HI>Lex paerticu|laris cedit generali;</HI> &s;o Laws, that concern Particular Ca&s;es or Con&s;ociations, mu&s;t give place to the generall Law of more generall Ca&s;es, and Con&s;ociati|ons; for the generall good of Con&s;ociations, is to be preferred before the Particular good of Particular Per&s;ons, or Particular Con&s;ociations.</P>
<P N="15">15. All the Churches here upon Earth make up one Republike, tyed toge|ther by Faith, Charity, and other Particular Chri&s;tian vertues; as that in Heaven another: Now it is a <HI>Maxime</HI> in <HI>Politicks, Salus Reipub. &s;uprema Lex e&s;to. Ergo,</HI> There mu&s;t be one Law, common to this whole Chri&s;tian Republike: If &s;o, <HI>Ergo,</HI> There mu&s;t be &s;ome vi&s;ible Iudges to judge accord|ing to this Law, otherwayes in vain &s;hould we have it; Now this vi&s;ible Iudge can be no other, but a <HI>Synod;</HI> For if ye &s;ay, it is <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> then we can|not be legally Iudged, according to this Law, till the day of Iudgement, when <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> &s;hall Iudge the quick and the dead; which is mo&s;t ridicu|lous.</P>
<P N="16">16. <HI>C. C.</HI> acknowledgeth, That by Bapti&s;m we are made Members of the Univer&s;all Militant Church, and con&s;equently Subjects of &s;ome Chri&s;tian Republike: <HI>Ergo,</HI> There are &s;ome Iudges to judge &s;uch Subjects: But tho&s;e Iudges are not in one Particular Church; for by Bapti&s;m, as he &s;ayeth, They
<PB N="94" REF="53">are not admitted to the &s;ocietie of any Particular <HI>Church. Ergo,</HI> They mu&s;t be judged by &s;ome greater Repre&s;entative <HI>Church,</HI> which mu&s;t be either <HI>Cla&s;|&s;icall, Provinciall, Nationall,</HI> or <HI>Oecumenicall.</HI></P>
<P N="17">17. It is a generall Rule of S. <HI>Paul</HI> in matter of <HI>Church Government, That the Spirits of Prophets be &s;ubject to Prophets,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14 32. Which cannot at all, or at lea&s;t cannot ea&s;ily, and commodiou&s;ly be obtained in the Inde|pendent Oppo&s;ition, or Coordination, as in &s;ome Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call A&s;&s;emblies or Iudicatories; for when all are equall, there is no &s;ubjection of one to another.</P>
<P N="18">18. This Doctrine of Subordination of Inferiour Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicato|ries to their Superiours, with a Coordination of Inferiour Iudicatories, or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall A&s;&s;emblies among&s;t them&s;elves, is mo&s;t convenient to the na|ture of the Sacraments, in receiving unto them all &s;uch, as are our Brethren in <HI>Chri&s;t;</HI> whereas a meer Oppo&s;ition, Independency, or at mo&s;t a Coordi|nation of <HI>Churches,</HI> founded on a meer will and charitie, without any Law, is repugnant to it, in &s;o far forth, as it debarreth from them &s;uch as are worthy to be received.</P>
<P N="19">19. The Apo&s;tle commands, That <HI>all things be done decently, and in order,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 14.40. And telleth us, That <HI>God is not the Author of Confu&s;ion, but of Peace, Ver&s;.</HI> 33. Now, where there is no <HI>Subordination</HI> of <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judi|catories;</HI> When none of them is &s;ubject one to another, but they are all equall; when one <HI>Church,</HI> be &s;he never &s;o corrupted in life and Doctrine, hath as great Authority over all the <HI>Churches</HI> of the World, repre&s;ented together in a <HI>Synod,</HI> be they never &s;o &s;ound in their life and Doctrine, as they all have over her, What can be done decently and in order? I adjure you all, tell me in Con&s;cience, Whether ye think that God can be the Author of any &s;uch order, or rather of &s;o abominable a confu&s;ion.</P>
<P N="20">20. I could &s;hew, how that this Subordination is mo&s;t convenient, and the contrary Independency, Oppo&s;ition, or Coordination of <HI>Churches</HI> founded on mans meer will, is mo&s;t repugnant, 1. unto the perfection, that appeareth in all Gods Works, both in tho&s;e of Nature, and of Grace: 2. To Gods Truth and Wi&s;dom, in giving no better means for redre&s;&s;ing of Offences. 3. To his Iu&s;tice, in making of Laws, that cannot &s;uppre&s;&s;e Here&s;ies, and all &s;ort of wickedne&s;&s;e in di&s;ordered <HI>Churches.</HI> 4. To his Mercy, that in fur|ni&s;hing us &s;o graciou&s;ly &s;o many means, and helps to Salvation, he &s;hould have given us this Independent Anarchy, to cro&s;&s;e them all, yea, to lead us irre&s;i&s;ti|bly to Hell. 5. To his Providence, in providing of means, &s;o di&s;proportion|ate, and incommen&s;urated for &s;o excellent an end, <HI>viz.</HI> for the peace of the <HI>Church;</HI> means more fit to trouble, then to procure her peace, and to put all the <HI>Churches</HI> of God in confu&s;ion, rather then in order.</P>
<P N="21">21. Is it credible, that God &s;hould have given his Son to death, to purcha&s;e us an Order, whereby all Churches might live in Peace and Unity, and yet
<PB N="95" REF="53">make them to quit all Sacramentall Communion one with another, having no common Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, nor any common plat-forme of Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call Government among them?</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<HEAD>Whether in the Militant vi&s;ible Church there &s;hould be an Jndependency of Churches.</HEAD>
<DIV3 N="1" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. I.</HI> The Que&s;tion Stated.</HEAD>
<P>_AS <HI>M. S.</HI> of the fir&s;t Que&s;tion made two, &s;o doth he here of the &s;econd other two, viz. his third Que&s;tion for Presbyte|riall Government, whereof he treated in the former chap. and his 4. Que&s;tion of Independency, whereof he treateth in this his 4. chap. but they are not two Que&s;tions, but two divers Opinions about one, and the &s;ame Que&s;tion; &s;o ha|ving committed this fault, he commits againe another, much wor&s;e; for he goeth on very confu&s;edly in the beginning of his Di&s;pute, and without ever &s;tating the Que&s;tion, or declaring what he meaneth by Inde|pendency, he goeth about to ju&s;tifie his Independent government in a Cataske|va&s;tique, or a&s;&s;ertive way: wherefore to the end that the Reader may the better judge both of his Cataskeva&s;tique, and of my Anaskeva&s;tique way, I will &s;tate the Que&s;tion, and &s;hew, what he hath to prove, and I to refute. 1. Note therefore I pray thee, courteous Reader, that Independency is a &s;ort of Eccle&s;ia&s;tical Go|vernment, whereby every particular Church is ruled by its Mini&s;ter, its Doctor, &s;ome Ruling Elders, and all tho&s;e, who are admitted to be Members thereof, who, how Heterodox, and Haereticall &s;oever they be in Doctrine, and how wicked and damnable &s;oever they be in their Lives, will not yet &s;ubmit to a|ny Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power what&s;oever, yea not to that of all the Churches of the world, were they never &s;o Orthodox and holy in their lives.</P>
<P N="2">2. Note, that the rea&s;on, wherefore they will not &s;ubmit to any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall authority, according to their opinion, is not out of any di&s;obedience in them|&s;elves, as they pretend, but for want of authority in the Churches; for they be|leeve that howbeit any particular Church, or any of her members &s;hould fal in|to never &s;o damnable Here&s;ies, or wickedne&s;&s;e, that yet God hath not ordained any authoritative power to judge her; but that her power is as great, as that of all the Churches in the world; and that all that they can do in &s;uch a ca&s;e, is no more, but only to Coun&s;ell her, as &s;he may do them; and in ca&s;e &s;he will not
<PB N="96" REF="54">follow their Coun&s;ell, that they ought to do nothing el&s;e, but onely declare, that they will have no more communion with her, as &s;he may likewi&s;e do to them in the like ca&s;e, viz. if they will not follow her Advice, when &s;he is of|fended with their Doctrine, Government, Life, or Proceedings.</P>
<P>The Que&s;tion then betwixt us, and them, is, whether God hath e&s;tabli&s;hed any &s;uch Independent Government in his Church, or not.</P>
<P>We deny it. <HI>M. S.</HI> affirmeth it, and argueth as followeth:</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Page 75. of his Book, Who then can lay any thing to the charge of this Government? That can I, quoth <HI>A. S.</HI> in effect, page 38, 39. &amp;c. I have 10. Rea&s;ons or Objections again&s;t it. <HI>A. S.</HI> I confe&s;&s;e that <HI>M.</HI> S. braggeth of this his Independent Government, as his words expre&s;&s;e; but it is a manife&s;t untruth, that ever I bragged of 16. Rea&s;ons, as <HI>M. S.</HI> mo&s;t fooli&s;hly repre&s;enteth me here: It is <HI>A. S.</HI> his cu&s;tome to bring Rea&s;ons, and not to boa&s;t of them; as it is <HI>M. S.</HI> his manner to boa&s;t and bragg with high words, without any rea&s;on at all: And for an&s;wer to this, I &s;ay there is no one &s;uch word or expre&s;&s;ion in all my Booke: It is but <HI>M. S.</HI> his words, and fiction.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> I &s;hall not &s;pend time in tran&s;cribing the&s;e your Rea&s;ons, but &s;hall de&s;ire the Reader, though it may be &s;ome di&s;courte&s;ie unto you, to take your Booke into his hand.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I am bound to your courte&s;ie, good Sir, that will not let my weake Rea&s;ons appeare in Front again&s;t your &s;trong An&s;wers: But &s;ince it is not <HI>M. S.</HI> his plea&s;ure, that they appeare in his mo&s;t wor|thy Booke, I hope that the courteous Reader &s;hall not be offended, if I make them, together with his An&s;wers, and <HI>A. S.</HI> his Duplyes appeare here in mine.</P>
<P>My Arguments then, were &s;uch as follow.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="2" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. II.</HI> Rea&s;ons again&s;t the Independency of Particular Congregations.</HEAD>
<P N="1">1. THe Independent Churches have no &s;ufficient remedy for mi&s;cariages, though never &s;o gro&s;&s;e; no reliefe for wrongfull Sentences, or Per&s;ons injured by them; no Powerfull or Effectuall meanes to reduce a Church, or Churches, that fall into Here&s;ie, or Schi&s;me, &amp;c. All that they can doe, is only to pronounce a <HI>Sentence</HI> of <HI>Non-Communion</HI> again&s;t <HI>Delinquent Churches,</HI> as on the other &s;ide, <HI>Delinquent Churches</HI> may doe again&s;t them.</P>
<P N="2">2. This Remedy is new, neither was it known to the Independent Congre|gations, before that emergent Ca&s;e in <HI>Holland,</HI> related in the <HI>Apologeticall Narration:</HI> for if that Church offending had known &s;o much, it is not cre|dible, that &s;he would, again&s;t all charity, and the common Order of all Churches, have committed &s;o great a Scandall.</P>
<P N="3">3. This Remedy is not &s;ufficient, nor &s;atisfactory, becau&s;e all Churches,
<PB N="97" REF="54">according to your Tenets, are equall in Authority, independent one of an|other; and <HI>Par in parem non habet imperium,</HI> None hath power or authority over his Equall; How then could any Church binde another to any &s;uch Account, but out of its free will, as a Party may doe to its Party?</P>
<P N="4">4. Becau&s;e the Churches, that are, or that pretend to be offended by a Delinquent Church, cannot judge her, for then they become both Iudge, and Party in one cau&s;e, which cannot be granted to tho&s;e who have no <HI>Authori|tative power</HI> one over another; as when a Private man offendeth the State, and We our God.</P>
<P N="5">5. What if many Churches, yea all the Churches &s;hould offend one, &s;hould that one Church gather all the re&s;t together, judge them all, and in ca&s;e of not &s;ubmitting them&s;elves to her judgement, &s;eparate her &s;elfe from them all? If &s;o, we &s;hould have Separations and Schi&s;mes enough, which &s;hould be con|tinued to all Po&s;teritie to come.</P>
<P N="6">6. What if Churches were &s;o remote one from another, that they could not &s;o ea&s;ily meet together upon every occa&s;ion? Then there &s;hould be no Remedy, at lea&s;t no ea&s;ie Remedy.</P>
<P N="7">7. What if the Offence were &s;mall? Should &s;o many Churches, for every trifle, gather together, and put them&s;elves to &s;o great co&s;t and trouble?</P>
<P N="8">8. What if the Churches &s;hould differ in their Iudgements, one from an|other? In &s;uch a ca&s;e, &s;hould they all, by Schi&s;mes, &s;eparate them&s;elves one from another?</P>
<P N="9">9. This &s;ort of Government giveth no more Power or Authority to a thou&s;and Churches over one, then to a Tinker, yea, to a Hangman, over a thou&s;and; for he may de&s;ire them all, out of charitie, to give an account of their Iudgement, in ca&s;e he be offended by them; Neither &s;ee I what more our Brethren grant to all the Churches of the World over one.</P>
<P>But the Presbyteriall Government is &s;ubject to none of the&s;e inconveni|ences; for the collective or combined Elder&s;hip having an Authoritative power, all men and Churches thereof are bound by Law and Covenant to &s;ubmit them&s;elves thereunto: Every man knoweth their &s;et times of meeting, wherein &s;undry matters are di&s;patched, and all things caried by Plurality of Voyces, without any Schi&s;me or Separation.</P>
<P N="10">10. This Government, viz. <HI>Iedependency,</HI> is a Power, wherein the Party is judged, if he will; and &s;o the Iudgement of the Iudges &s;u&s;pended upon the Iudgement of the Party judged; which is mo&s;t ridiculous, without any exam|ple in Civill, or Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories: a Iudgement not very unlike to that, which is related of a merry man, who &s;aid, That he had the be&s;t, and mo&s;t obedient Wife in the World, becau&s;e, &s;aith he, &s;he willeth nothing, but what I will: And as all men wondred at it, (knowing her to be the mo&s;t di&s;|obedient) yea (&s;aith he) but I mu&s;t fir&s;t will what &s;he willeth, el&s;e &s;he wills nothing that I will.</P>
<PB N="98" REF="55">
<P N="11">11. This &s;ort of Government is unju&s;t, and unrea&s;onable; for not only the Party judgeth its Party, but al&s;o in&s;licteth the &s;ame puni&s;hment, viz. <HI>Sepa|ration,</HI> upon all offending Churches, whatever the offence be, great or &s;mall, in ca&s;e of non-&s;atisfaction; whereas all Puni&s;hments &s;hould be commen&s;ura|ble unto the &s;everall Offences.</P>
<P N="12">12. And &s;o ye &s;eem to approve the Opinion of the Stoicks, who held all &s;innes to be equall; &s;ince ye inflict the &s;ame puni&s;hment upon them all.</P>
<P N="13">13. Not only this Di&s;cipline cannot be ea&s;ily put in execution in great Kingdomes, as <HI>England,</HI> wherein all the Churches offended cannot &s;o ea&s;ily meet together: But al&s;o,</P>
<P N="14">14. Becau&s;e the per&s;on offended, after he hath repre&s;ented his grievances unto the Church, and that Church hath received &s;atisfaction, he may goe to another; and &s;o continually, <HI>in infinitum,</HI> to the Worlds end, evermore ta|king tho&s;e Churches for the Party, that judge it; which is mo&s;t ab&s;urd and fooli&s;h.</P>
<P N="15">15. What if the Party offended be poore, and have not the meanes to po&s;t up and down from neigbour-Church to neighbour-Church, to pray them to make the offending Church to give an account of her Iudgement? Much le&s;&s;e, to attend upon their uncertain conveniencie? Here will be found true, <HI>Pauper ubique jacet;</HI> Whereas in Presbyteriall Government, the Party offended may be ea&s;ily redre&s;&s;ed, and get &s;atisfaction, as not having need &s;o to po&s;t up and down, to be at &s;o great charges, or to attend their conveniencie; for by a &s;imple Appeale he may binde the Church offending to appeare at the day ap|pointed.</P>
<P N="16">16. What if there &s;hould fall out an hundred &s;uch offences in a &s;hort time? Mu&s;t &s;o many Churches evermore gather together for every one of them apart?</P>
<P N="17">17. What if Churches be poore, and cannot be at &s;o great expence? Then in that ca&s;e, it &s;hould &s;eem, there is no Order to meet with Offences. I may adde the&s;e following Rea&s;ons:</P>
<P N="18">18. This <HI>Independencie</HI> maketh all the Churches of Chri&s;t like &s;o many <HI>Scopae di&s;&s;olutae,</HI> loo&s;e Broomes, that have no tye or band to hold them together; and &s;o de&s;troyeth the unity of the Militant Church.</P>
<P N="19">19. The very word <HI>Independencie,</HI> applied to men, how much more the thing &s;ignified thereby, &s;hould be odious to all Chri&s;tian ears, as being proper to God Almighty. How proud &amp; abominable is this expre&s;&s;ion; <HI>We &s;even men, who con|&s;titute this Church, we will not depend on all the Churches of this World; We will not depend on any create Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, yea not upon all the Angels in Heaven, and men upon Earth: but will be Independents, and have others to depend upon us?</HI></P>
<P N="20">20. If &s;o, what is the cau&s;e that ye oppo&s;e the Kings Maje&s;ties Ab&s;olute or Independent power in State matters? Truly, this being only Secular, cannot be &s;o dangerous as the other, viz. as Yours; for this only may be prejudiciall
<PB N="99" REF="55">to our Bodies, or States; but Yours may kill millions of Soules: neither is the Kings Authority more limited in the State, then yours is in the Church.</P>
<P N="21">21. What? will ye, that where-ever there is 7. or 8. of you combined to|gether, to make up a Church, ye &s;hall depend on no man, but have an inde|pendent and ab&s;olute power to bring into the Kingdome whatever Here&s;ie ye plea&s;e, to bla&s;pheme God, and &s;o, <HI>vi irre&s;i&s;tibili,</HI> with the Arminians, to goe to Hell? If &s;o, God have mercy on you.</P>
<P>But it may be &s;aid, that the Civill Magi&s;trate may hinder them: But <HI>M.S.</HI> will an&s;wer, 1. That he &s;hould not puni&s;h any man for Religion. 2. That the Civill Power is of another &s;ort then Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall. 3. What if the Civill Magi&s;trate be not a <HI>Prote&s;tant?</HI> or what if he be a profane man? 4. Howbeit he were a <HI>Prote&s;tant,</HI> and a good Chri&s;tian, yet &s;hould it follow, that the Church-power is neither &s;ufficient, nor perfect, <HI>in &s;uo genere;</HI> &s;ince it mu&s;t have recour&s;e unto the Civill Magi&s;trates power, which is of another nature, and <HI>extra hoc Genus.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="3" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. III. M.S.</HI> his Eva&s;ions refuted, and my Arguments made good, and fir&s;t, tho&s;e that he bringeth again&s;t the third Argument.</HEAD>
<P>M.S. an&s;wereth not all, nor any con&s;iderable number of my Arguments, as he confe&s;&s;eth him&s;elfe; but &s;cratcheth at a few of them, whereby he weakens them not; but overthroweth the Government of all States; That of the Church of the Old Te&s;tament, the Practice of the Apo&s;tles, and Apo&s;tolike Churches, and the fundaments of Independent Government it &s;elf, as, God willing, we &s;hall &s;ee hereafter. The fir&s;t of my Rea&s;ons, that he &s;naps at, is the 3. <HI>viz.</HI></P>
<P>This Remedy, viz. of <HI>non-Communion,</HI> is not &s;ufficient, nor &s;atisfactory; be|cau&s;e all Churches according to your Tenets be equall in authority, Inde|pendent one of another, and <HI>par in parem non habet imperium,</HI> none hath power or authority over his equall: How then could any Church binde any o|ther to any &s;uch accompt, but out of its freewill, as a party may doe to its party?</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 1. Suppo&s;e that cour&s;e, which the Apologi&s;ts in&s;i&s;t upon, be not in the eye of rea&s;on, a means &s;ufficient to &s;uch a purpo&s;e, yet if it be a meanes which God hath authorized, for the effecting it, it will do the deed.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> It &s;eemth that <HI>M.S.</HI> would fain enter into the Li&s;ts again&s;t Rea&s;on it &s;elf; but he mu&s;t know, that Gods Ordinance, and Rea&s;on, are not oppo&s;ite one to another; &s;ince he who is the author of Nature, is the Author of Grace al&s;o: neither as Author of Nature, &s;ights he again&s;t him&s;elf, as Author of Grace. 2. It is a Maxime of Popery and Lutherani&s;me, to oppo&s;e Nature &amp; Grace. 3. Chri&s;t and the Apo&s;tles &s;erved them&s;elves of Naturall Rea&s;on in Scripture. 4. And out of the ca&s;e of &s;upernaturall revelation above it, which cannot be contrary
<PB N="100" REF="56">unto it, it mu&s;t be beleeved. 5 He &s;uppo&s;eth, that Independency, and with|drawing and renouncing all Chri&s;tian Communion with &s;uch Churches, un|till they repent, is a &s;ufficient meanes, authorized by God, which hitherto ap|peareth not; yea the contrary appeareth by our Rea&s;ons. 6. Yet is it &s;ome|thing, that I have rea&s;on, for me, and he none; yea nothing but his Inde|pendent will.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> will not make good the Rea&s;ons brought for this Opinion by the Apologi&s;ts, which I have abundantly re&s;uted, but proveth, as followeth; <HI>That a withdrawing of Chri&s;tian Communion</HI> from per&s;ons walking inor|dinately, is an Ordinance, or meanes appointed by God, for the reducing, and reclaiming of them. 2. The&s;. 3.6.14. <HI>We warn you Brethren in the name of our Lord Je&s;us Chri&s;t, that ye withdraw your &s;elves from every Bro|ther, that walketh inordinately,</HI> (<HI>A. S.</HI> I adde the re&s;t) Ver&s;. 7. <HI>For we behaved not our &s;elves inordinately among you.</HI> Ver&s;. 8. <HI>Neither did we eate any mans bread for nought, but wrought with labour and travell, night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you.</HI> Ver&s;. 10. <HI>This we commanded you, that if any would not worke, neither &s;hould he eate.</HI> Ver&s;. 11. <HI>For we heare, that there are &s;ome which walke among you inordinately, working not at all, but are bu&s;ie-bodies.</HI> Ver&s;. 14. <HI>If any man obey not our word by this E|pi&s;tle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be a&s;hamed.</HI> Ver&s;. 15. <HI>Yet count him not as an Enemy, but admoni&s;h him as a Brother.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But this proofe, is no better, then that of the Apologi&s;ts; and to An&s;wer it, I will not &s;erve my &s;elfe with the An&s;wer, that &s;ome men bring here, viz. That this Te&s;timony of Scripture is not to be taken of the great Excommunication, which onely you &s;eeme to acknowledge for Excommuni|cation: nor of the le&s;&s;er, which you &s;eeme to call <HI>non-Communion,</HI> or with the Apo&s;tle here, <HI>withdrawing of Chri&s;tian Communion.</HI> 2. Or that it is a Com|mandement onely given to particular per&s;ons, to forbear &s;uch per&s;ons, who were idle, and yet bu&s;ie-bodies, running from hou&s;e to hou&s;e, living upon other mens charges, under pretext (peradventure) of Piety: But not to the Church, to <HI>excommunicate them;</HI> and that, becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle addeth, v. 15. <HI>Yet count him not as an Enemy, but as a Brother:</HI> for this Rea&s;on is weak: and an Excommunicate per&s;on, if he be Excommunicated <HI>Excommunicatione minori,</HI> yea and &s;ometimes <HI>majori,</HI> may be accounted as a Brother, &s;o long as there is any hope of his Repentance.</P>
<P>I had rather &s;ay, 1. That here the Apo&s;tle &s;peaketh of Excommunication; 1. Becau&s;e he &s;ayes, <HI>Note him,</HI> i. e. that he may be di&s;cerned from others. 2. He &s;ayes, <HI>Have no company,</HI> or meddle not with him. Now what is Excom|munication, but to have no Communion or company with a man. 2. I &s;ay, that he &s;peaketh not of the greater, but of the le&s;&s;er Excommunication, 1. Be|cau&s;e, that it is not for any great crime, but for an ordinary &s;inne, viz. <HI>Idlene&s;&s;e.</HI> 2. Becau&s;e this note of Excommunication, is only, that he may be a&s;hamed.</P>
<PB N="101" REF="56">
<P N="3">3. Becau&s;e he is not to be reputed for an enemy of the Church, but as a Brother. 4. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle biddeth onely, <HI>Note him,</HI> and admoni&s;h him: which is le&s;&s;e then to be given over to Sathan; yea it is credible, that it was only a private Su&s;pen&s;ion from the Lords Table, not in publique, in face of the whole Church, but before the particular Presbytery. 3. He &s;eemeth not to &s;peake directly of whole Churches, but of particular per&s;ons. 1. Since he &s;ayes, <HI>From every Brother,</HI> ver&s;. 6. 2. Becau&s;e he &s;ayes, that there are &s;ome among you that <HI>walke inordinately:</HI> Now the whole Church can|not be &s;aid to be among the Church, or &s;ome of the Church, but particular per&s;ons only. 3. Becau&s;e he &s;ayeth, <HI>If any man obey not, let that man be noted;</HI> but if the whole Church were &s;uch, there &s;hould be none there to <HI>note</HI> him. 4. <HI>That man</HI> cannot &s;ignifie <HI>that Church.</HI> 5. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tle, ver&s;. 15. commandeth to <HI>admoni&s;h him as a Brother,</HI> but a <HI>Brother</HI> is not a <HI>Church.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. And neverthele&s;&s;e, how&s;oever the Apo&s;tle &s;peakes principally, directly, and formally of the Excommunication of Per&s;ons; yet mu&s;t he con&s;equently and directly meane al&s;o the Excommunication of Churches; and that for the Rea&s;ons, that I brought el&s;e where, viz. in the Ob&s;ervations and Annotati|ons upon the Apologeticall Narration, page 43. &sect;. 2. 1. For Churches Of|fences may de&s;erve it. 2. The Scripture hath nothing to the contrary of Excommunication of Churches. 3 Becau&s;e there is the &s;ame rea&s;on for the Excommunication of whole Churches, as of particular Per&s;ons, viz. The taking away of Scandall, and the conver&s;ion of &s;inners, 1 Cor. 5.5. 2 Cor. 2.7. 2. The&s;. 3.14. 1 Tim. 1.20. and that &s;uch a contagion infect not others, 1 Cor. 5.6, 7. And this rea&s;on <HI>M. S.</HI> very wi&s;ely borrowed from me in this place, &s;aying, <HI>There is the &s;ame rea&s;on of Churches in this behalf, which there is of per&s;ons, M. S.</HI> to <HI>A. S.</HI> page 76. Onely this I note here, that if there be the &s;ame rea&s;on of Churches. <HI>Ergo,</HI> As a Particular per&s;on may be Excommunicated <HI>Excommunicatione minori,</HI> by a publike, or a particular &s;entence of non-<HI>Communion,</HI> for a le&s;&s;er fault; &s;o may a whole Church: And con&s;equently, as a particular per&s;on may be Excommunicated, <HI>Excommuni|catione majori,</HI> for a very great &s;in, and wickedne&s;&s;e; &s;o may a whole parti|cular Church, which the Independent Sect will no wayes grant. And this, I pray the Reader to ob&s;erve, and to pre&s;&s;e it again&s;t them; for I am a&s;&s;ured they cannot here e&s;cape, unle&s;&s;e <HI>M. S.</HI> e&s;cape them. 4. Becau&s;e 7000. Churches may as well Excommunicate one compounded of &s;eventeen Per&s;ons, as that one may Excommunicate &s;even of its Members. 5. Becau&s;e an Hereticall Church is Excommunicated in Heaven; Wherefore then &s;hall &s;he not be Excommunicated by Chri&s;ts Mini&s;ters here upon Earth, when they learn it by Scripture? Mu&s;t not the Churches here upon Earth, concur as well with Gods Sentence in Heaven, as God with theirs here upon Earth, <HI>Matth.</HI> 18? 6. Becau&s;e the Church of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> Excommunicated that of the ten Tribes.</P>
<PB N="102" REF="57">
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;econd An&s;wer to this Argument. Suppo&s;e there were no &s;uch &s;ufficient, or &s;atisfactory <HI>remedy</HI> for the <HI>inconveniency</HI> mentioned in the way of the <HI>Apologi&s;ts,</HI> yet <HI>Lawyers</HI> have a &s;aying, <HI>That a mi&s;chief is better then an inconveniency,</HI> &amp;c. (and afterwards) Now then much better is it to want a <HI>remedy</HI> again&s;t &s;uch an evill, which po&s;&s;ibly may not fall out within an age, though it be greater, when it doth fall, then it is to expo&s;e our &s;elves to <HI>continuall droppings,</HI> I mean to tho&s;e daily <HI>inconveniencies, which we lately &s;hewed to be incident to the Cla&s;&s;ique Government.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I accept of your Suppo&s;ition, <HI>viz.</HI> That there is no &s;ufficient, or &s;atisfactory remedy, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> as it appeareth cleerly by my Rea&s;ons. 2. To your Maxime of Law, I grant you willingly, That ye have no remedy again&s;t mi&s;|chiefs, but your Churches mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily &s;uffer them, and are expo&s;ed to them: Prai&s;ed be God, that Presbyterians &s;erve them&s;elves with no mi&s;|chievous, but with very holy Remedies. 3. I deny, that it is better to want a Remedy again&s;t &s;uch a mi&s;chief: <HI>viz.</HI> If a Church Apo&s;tatize, become Hereticall, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> then to accept of the Presbyterian Remedy again&s;t &s;uch mi&s;|chief, or of the mi&s;chief it &s;elf; for we mu&s;t never in any Ca&s;e accept of <HI>malum culpae,</HI> &s;uch as is the acceptation of Apo&s;ta&s;ie or Here&s;ie in a whole Church. 4. Neither is there any, nor have you yet &s;hewn any Inconveni|ency in the Presbyteriall way: But we have &s;hewn many, as Reall in the In|dependent way, as tho&s;e are imaginary that you attribute to the Presbyterian way. 5. All the Inconveniency that this man pretends to be in the Presbyte|rian way, is, Dependency of particular Congregations upon Superiour A&s;&s;em|blies, <HI>viz.</HI> Cla&s;&s;es, Synods, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Or Subordination among&s;t Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories; for this Sect mu&s;t be altogether Independent, and every one in their Churches &s;upreme Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judges, and their Churches &s;upreme Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories, be they never &s;o Hereticall or prophane: But this Inconveniency may be pre&s;&s;ed home again, 1. For there is Subordination among their particular Congregations, and their Synods; onely they hate the Authority of Synods. 2. There was a Subordination of Authority in the Old Te&s;tament. 3. So is there in Civill Government; And what&s;oever In|conveniency they pre&s;&s;e again&s;t us, it will hold in all the re&s;t, as we &s;hall &s;ee hereafter, God willing. 4. If &s;uch a Dependency, or Subordination be any Inconveniency, then God is the cau&s;e of it, as we have heretofore fully de|mon&s;trated it.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Delinquency of whole Churches is not an every dayes Ca&s;e, no more in the way of <HI>Congregationall,</HI> then of <HI>Presbyteriall Government.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. It may be as ordinary a Ca&s;e in the <HI>Church,</HI> as that of Inferiour Iudicatories in the State. 2. And it fell out among&s;t the Arminians, and us; 3. So did it among&s;t your <HI>Churches</HI> in <HI>Holland;</HI> 4. So doth it betwixt you and us, &s;ince ye are become Sectaries; 5. So doth it among all <HI>Churches,</HI> that become Hereticall, or Schi&s;maticall, and the <HI>Orthodox Church;</HI> and the Apo&s;tle tell|eth
<PB N="103" REF="57">us, that there mu&s;t be Here&s;ies, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 11.19. So it is not &s;o extraordinary a Ca&s;e, as you <HI>M. S.</HI> make it. And therefore, there mu&s;t be an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Ordinance</HI> for it, as well in the Church, as in the State; 1. Unle&s;&s;e you &s;ay, That God is more provident for the <HI>State,</HI> then for the <HI>Church;</HI> or more negligent in his care of the <HI>Church,</HI> then of the <HI>State.</HI> 2. There was a re|medy for &s;uch Ca&s;es in the Old Te&s;tament, as I &s;hewed you in my <HI>Annotations;</HI> wherefore not al&s;o in the New Te&s;tament? 3. Howbeit, it be not an every dayes Ca&s;e, yet the Independents have a <HI>remedy</HI> for it; <HI>viz.</HI> The Sentence of non-Communion, whereof I may &s;ay as much, as he &s;ayes of Excommuni|cation; for the <HI>Independent Churches</HI> could not pronounce &s;uch a Sentence, unle&s;&s;e they had, or pretended to have an Authoritative power to do it; for it belongeth to the power of the Keyes. 4. It is, or may be more ordinary among&s;t the <HI>Independent Churches,</HI> then among ours. 1. Becau&s;e of their In|dependency, and want of Superiour Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, to keep them in order: 2. Becau&s;e they tye the Members of their <HI>Churches,</HI> never to quit them, without the <HI>Churches</HI> con&s;ent, whereof they are Members, which may breed quarrels betwixt two-<HI>Churches,</HI> if a Member of the one, without her con&s;ent, joyn him&s;elf to the other. 3. And this may be confirmed by the Examples of tho&s;e mo&s;t bitter quarrels betwixt two of your Churches, and their Pa&s;tors in <HI>Holland,</HI> as it is related by Ma&s;ter <HI>Edwards</HI> in his <HI>Antapologia:</HI> but according to ordinary Providence, no &s;uch thing can fall out among our Churches; and if it &s;hould fall out, we have a pre&s;ent remedy, <HI>viz.</HI> a Cla&s;&s;e, which may be gathered within the &s;pace of four or five dayes: if that do not the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, we may gather a Synod or a Superiour power, which cannot Morally be contemned among us by any Inferiour power, as the equall power of Independent Churches may by their equall.</P>
<P>If it fall out extraordinarily among&s;t us, we have an ordinary remedy for &s;uch an extraordinary Ca&s;e.</P>
<P>And howbeit, it were extraordinary, and very rare; yet &s;hould there be a remedy provided for it, &s;o &s;oon as once it falleth out, for it is a Ca&s;e, that bringeth a very great mi&s;chief with it, <HI>viz.</HI> The revoult of a Church or many Churches, that is an inconvenience, yea, a mi&s;chief a thou&s;and times wor&s;e, howbeit, it &s;hould fall out but once in an Age, then all the <HI>droppings</HI> of Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwin,</HI> or all the <HI>inconveniencies,</HI> that can be alleadged again&s;t a con&s;tant <HI>remedy,</HI> were they as reall, as they are fictitious and imaginary.</P>
<P>Thirdly, <HI>M. S.</HI> an&s;wereth my fir&s;t Argument: They that implead the Con|gregationall way, for being defective; &s;uppo&s;e, that God hath put a &s;uffici|ency of power into the hands of men, to <HI>remedy</HI> all po&s;&s;ible defects, errours, and mi&s;carriages of men what&s;oever. But that is untrue. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer; They &s;uppo&s;e not, that God hath put into their hands a &s;ufficiency of power to remedy all defects and mi&s;carriages what&s;oever; or all po&s;&s;ible ab&s;olutely, but <HI>ex &s;uppo&s;itione finis obtinendi, i. e.</HI> that may conduce
<PB N="104" REF="58">to obtain the end, that God hath commanded us to intend, and to tend unto; for &s;ince his will is, that &s;pirituall di&s;ea&s;es be cured, it mu&s;t con&s;equently be, to give the <HI>remedies</HI> nece&s;&s;ary or &s;ufficient to obtain &s;uch an end or cure. 2. I &s;uppo&s;e not that God hath given us all means &s;ufficient <HI>Phy&s;ic&egrave;,</HI> but <HI>moraliter, i. e.</HI> that are morally &s;ufficient, and whereby morally we may be convicted of &s;in, if we u&s;e them not; as cured of our ill, if we u&s;e them. 3. I &s;uppo&s;e, that they mu&s;t be &s;ufficient according to Gods ordinary providence, whereby he governeth ordinarily his Church, and not ab&s;olutely. 4. As &s;ufficient, as in the <HI>Civill State,</HI> or as in the Old Te&s;tament at lea&s;t; &s;ince the Government in the New Te&s;tament, is as perfect, as in the Old; and not &s;imply or ab&s;o|lutely. And &s;o the A&s;&s;umption is fal&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> proveth, that this <HI>inconveniency</HI> pre&s;&s;eth as well the <HI>Presbyterians,</HI> as the <HI>Independents.</HI> If your Supreme <HI>Se&s;&s;ion</HI> of <HI>Presbyteries</HI> &s;hould mi&s;carry (&s;aith he) and give us Hay, Stubble, and Wood, in&s;tead of Silver and Gold, what remedy?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This is a very extraordinary <HI>Ca&s;e,</HI> yea, the mo&s;t extraordinary that can be imagined, <HI>viz.</HI> That all the <HI>Churches,</HI> both in Superiour and Inferiour Judicatories &s;hould &s;o mi&s;carry; and yet if a man have u&s;ed all po&s;&s;ible means, and this mi&s;carry al&s;o, which is more then any ordinary <HI>Ca&s;e,</HI> we may &s;ay, 1. that we have had all means that are morally po&s;&s;ible, and that no more can morally be de&s;ired. 2. We have had all the means, and if we &s;erved our &s;elves of them all, till we came to this extraordinary <HI>Ca&s;e,</HI> we are excu&s;able. 3. We have had all the means po&s;&s;ible, according to Gods ordinary Provi|dence. 4. All means, that they had in the Old Te&s;tament, or that they have in the State. 5. I an&s;wer, that this Suppo&s;ition may as well be propounded a|gain&s;t Gods Providence in the Government of the State, and of the <HI>Church</HI> of the Old Te&s;tament, as again&s;t that of the New. Now an&s;wer me, What if the great <HI>Sanedrim</HI> had mi&s;carried in the Old Te&s;tament, as &s;ome times it did; or the <HI>Parliament</HI> and the <HI>Kings Coun&s;ell</HI> in the <HI>State;</HI> what &s;hould be be done in &s;uch a <HI>Ca&s;e?</HI> And then I &s;hall an&s;wer you the other. It is a foolery to di&s;pute again&s;t Gods Ordinance. 6. I an&s;wer, That in &s;uch an extraordi|nary <HI>Ca&s;e,</HI> which goeth beyond all particular <HI>Laws,</HI> and <HI>Orders</HI> e&s;tabli&s;hed in the Church, <HI>viz.</HI> When all the ordinary <HI>Seers</HI> become blinde, or mi&s;lead the Flock, there being no ordinary, we mu&s;t have recour&s;e to &s;uch extraordi|nary <HI>remedies,</HI> as are mo&s;t convenient, or at lea&s;t not repugnant to Gods Word, and attend upon Gods extraordinary Providence. The Provinciall <HI>Synods</HI> may refu&s;e to put in execution the Acts of the Generall A&s;&s;embly; &s;o may particular <HI>Churches,</HI> for they are not bound to be Actors for the generall A&s;&s;embly, in any thing again&s;t Gods Word. 7. But what if in your petty <HI>Congregations</HI> of &s;even or eight per&s;ons, four per&s;ons, or perad|venture all the <HI>Congregation</HI> mi&s;carry? What &s;hall be done? You will happily &s;ay; 1. Seck <HI>Coun&s;ell:</HI> But if all the <HI>Congregation</HI> be corrupted, none of them will ask <HI>coun&s;ell,</HI> but they will all rather lurk, and hide their Tenets,
<PB N="105" REF="58">as the <HI>Independents</HI> do here at the <HI>Synod:</HI> If you &s;ay again, Other <HI>Churches</HI> that are offended, may complain to <HI>Neighbour Churches:</HI> But what if they know not their Tenets? What if the <HI>Delinquent Church</HI> will not own them, but Ie&s;uitically elude all Interrogatories, as the <HI>Antinomians,</HI> the <HI>Independents,</HI> and all other <HI>Sectaries</HI> do here? What if they own them? What can the <HI>Churches</HI> offended do; for <HI>M. S.</HI> will tell you, they cannot be Iudge, &s;ince they are Parties; or if they judge, they can but judge, as &s;o many Lackeys or Foot-Boyes: They have no more Authority to command that <HI>Delinquent Church,</HI> then that <HI>Delinquent Church</HI> hath to command them all.</P>
<P>Object. <HI>But they will pronounce a Sentence of non-Communion again&s;t Her.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> So will &s;he again&s;t them; and what then? What remedy for all this di&s;order, that is not taken away by all this, but &s;till increa&s;eth? It may be yet &s;aid, they may go to the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate. A. S.</HI> But that is no <HI>Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall</HI> remedy; and <HI>M. S.</HI> will tell you, 1. as well as I have done, that &s;o the la&s;t re&s;olution of <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall</HI> and <HI>Spirituall Judgements</HI> &s;hould be in the &s;ecular power, which he holds impo&s;&s;ible. 2. Yea, in the power of a Pagan or Antichri&s;tian Chri&s;tian. 3. And I mu&s;t &s;ay, That things are never re&s;olved, but into their own Principles, and &s;uch is not <HI>Politicall Authori|ty</HI> in re&s;pect of <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall.</HI> 4. So you have not entirene&s;&s;e of juri&s;diction, as <HI>M. S.</HI> and the re&s;t of the <HI>Independents</HI> pretend in his fir&s;t Rea&s;on. 5. So you are put to trouble and charges, which is again&s;t your other Rea&s;on: So 6. you are &s;ubject to Strangers, which de&s;troyeth your other Rea&s;on; for you hold for Strangers, all &s;uch, as be not of your particular <HI>Congregations,</HI> as your Rea&s;ons hereafter following, fully declare. 7. You are not ruled with|in your &s;elves, which de&s;troyes your other Rea&s;on: So 8. you &s;hall not be judged by your own Pa&s;tour, which is another of your Rea&s;ons. 9. You &s;hall be judged by one, who appearingly cannot fall in the &s;ame Ca&s;e, and &s;o it de&s;troyes your other Rea&s;on. 10. The party being tender Foreheaded, might be changed into a &s;tone before <HI>Medu&s;a</HI>'s Head, as you &s;ay, in pre&s;ence of &s;trange Faces, and of his Betters, which de&s;troyeth again another of your Rea&s;ons. I might bring many more Inconveniences again&s;t him, which he bringeth again&s;t us, as de&s;tructory to the &s;weet Liberties and Priviledges of the <HI>Church;</HI> But I mu&s;t be &s;hort: Onely I adde, that to &s;peak <HI>mor&egrave; humano;</HI> it is not credible, That all Inferiour Iudicatories, will or dare, be &s;o impudent, as to mi&s;carry in any thing, &s;o manife&s;tly contrary to the common Tenets or Practi&s;es of the whole <HI>Nationall Church,</HI> for the Inferiour Iudicatories will evermore fear, in ca&s;e of their unju&s;t Iudgement, to be condemned and cen|&s;ured in the Superiour; and the Supreme it &s;elf may fear, That if they judge any thing ami&s;&s;e, their Iudgements will not be approved, and put in executi|on in Particular Churches; and in all humane probability they are like to be cro&s;&s;ed.</P>
<PB N="106" REF="59">
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> asketh, what if an <HI>Occumenicall</HI> or <HI>Generall Coun&s;ell</HI> erre?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> His &s;uppo&s;itions are &s;o extraordinary, that they cannot belong but to <HI>Independent M. S.</HI> And yet, what I have already &s;aid, may &s;atisfie this al&s;o. Onely this man intends to defame Gods Ordinances, and his Word, as in&s;uf|ficient to rule the <HI>Church;</HI> and &s;o he may take the Bi&s;hops and Papi&s;ts by the hand.</P>
<P>And I ask, what if a <HI>Parliament</HI> erre? What if the great <HI>Sanedrin</HI> had erred in the Old Te&s;tament? What if the <HI>Councell</HI> at <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> had erred? An&s;wer me this, and then I &s;hall an&s;wer you.</P>
<P>The re&s;t of this <HI>Section, p.</HI> 77. containeth nothing but Repetitions, big Words, but no Rea&s;on.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="4" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. IV.</HI> The ju&s;tification of <HI>A. S.</HI> his Rea&s;on, How Presbyteriall Government is not &s;ubject to &s;uch Inconveniences as the Independencie.</HEAD>
<P>VVHereas in my ninth Rea&s;on, I &s;hew, That the <HI>Presbyteriall Govern|ment is &s;ubject to none of the&s;e Inconveniences,</HI> &amp;c.</P>
<P>Here <HI>M. S.</HI> an&s;wereth, 1. Here is a <HI>remedy</HI> indeed again&s;t &s;ome <HI>incon|veniences.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I willingly accept of this your confe&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> But whether the <HI>inconveniences</HI> be not much better, then the <HI>remedy, adhuc &s;ub judice lis e&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> So it is a doubt in <HI>M. S.</HI> his conceit, Whether it be not much better to tolerate, yea, to admit, and permit, a thou&s;and Here&s;ies, and Bla&s;phemies, and to let whole Churches go to Hell, then to &s;ubmit to <HI>Presbyteriall Govern|ment,</HI> &s;uch as we have defined it. 1. To let a Church be Hereticall, then to be reduced to <HI>Chri&s;t</HI> by any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power, meerly Spirituall and Mini|&s;teriall, or any other, &s;uch as was in the Old Te&s;tament, or as is in the State.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> What if your <HI>combined Elder&s;hip,</HI> hath neither footing, or foundati|on in the Word of God?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> What if it have foot and foundation on the Word of God? What if we have proved it already? What if it had no foot in Gods Word, but were no way repugnant unto it? Yet were it not in &s;uch a ca&s;e to be rejected, but by a thou&s;and fold to be preferred before Independency, whereupon fol|low &s;o many abominable ab&s;urdities, &s;o repugnant to Gods Word, yea unto Naturall Rea&s;on.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> It is not the &s;erviceablene&s;&s;e of it, again&s;t a thou&s;and &s;uch <HI>inconve|niencies,</HI> as were mentioned, that will ju&s;tifie it, <HI>and this he proveth by the examples of</HI> Sauls <HI>offering Sacrifice,</HI> 1 <HI>Sam.</HI> 23.9, 13, 14. Of <HI>&V;zzah</HI> in put|ting forth his hand to the Ark. <HI>Peters</HI> zeal in drawing his &s;word; And addeth,
<PB N="107" REF="59">That the Popes ab&s;olute Authority, is as Soveraign a Remedy again&s;t all the&s;e Inconveniencies as Cla&s;&s;ique Authority.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I argued not from meer <HI>inconveniences,</HI> but from <HI>conveniences;</HI> and the want of <HI>inconveniences,</HI> and <HI>repugnancy</HI> to Gods Word to ju&s;tifie our Government, and from <HI>inconveniences</HI> to refu&s;e yours; Neither can a Nega|tive <HI>The&s;is,</HI> be otherwayes proved, but by a <HI>Medium,</HI> that is repugnant either to the Attribute, or to the Subject of the Que&s;tion. So this your <HI>Cen&s;ure</HI> is very ridiculous, ab&s;urd, and impertinent. 2. I have proved it to be conform to Gods Word. 3. It is not credible, but that Government is mo&s;t conveni|ent to Gods Word, which is mo&s;t convenient, and commen&s;urate unto the end, That God commands us to intend, and to tend into; neither can I be|leeve, that God hath ordained us any means, that are not fit and proper for the end, that he intends, or commands us to intend; for that were <HI>repugnant</HI> to his Soveraign Wi&s;edom. 4. And as for your Examples, they are not to the purpo&s;e; for all the&s;e facts of <HI>Saul, &V;zzah, &amp;c.</HI> were contrary to Gods expre&s;&s;e command; neither were they convenient to the end intended by God, or that we &s;hould tend unto, <HI>viz.</HI> Filiall Obedience to the command, and the Typifying of Chri&s;t, and his Benefits. The example of Saint <HI>Peter</HI> was, 1. a manife&s;t breach of the &s;ixth Commandment, in killing a man with|out publike Authority. 2. It implyed an act of diffidence, and of too great confidence; as if Chri&s;t had had no other means to deliver him&s;elf, but his &s;word; in this <HI>Peter</HI> tru&s;ted too much to his own &s;word, and too little to Gods Providence. 3. It contained an act of Precipitation, and too great boldne&s;&s;e, and ra&s;hne&s;&s;e, in drawing his &s;word in his Ma&s;ters pre&s;ence, without, yea, again&s;t his Ma&s;ters will and command. 4. It was repugnant to the end, for which Chri&s;t came into the Word, <HI>viz.</HI> Chri&s;ts death, and the Redemption of mankinde by it, whereof <HI>Peter</HI> before that time had been &s;o oft adverti&s;ed, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> So is it not in <HI>Presbyteriall Di&s;cipline:</HI> Neither is there any damnable Errour or Here&s;ie in <HI>Con&s;i&s;toriall Government,</HI> as in the <HI>Papacy:</HI> We &s;ay not that any of our A&s;&s;emblies are Infallible, as the Pope pretends him&s;elf and his Generall Councell to be; neither pretend we, That our A&s;&s;emblies have any de&s;poticall or lordly domination over the Church, as the Pope doth; we &s;ay not, That our A&s;&s;emblies are above Gods Word, as they do. The&s;e compari&s;ons of <HI>M. S.</HI> are no le&s;&s;e then bla&s;phemous.</P>
<P>And here I mu&s;t adverti&s;e the Reader, That all the Presbyteriall A&s;&s;emblies together, take no greater Authority over the Church, then &s;ix or &s;even In|dependent Tinkers, an Hangman with them, together with one of their Mini&s;ters, do over the flock: The Independent Preacher with his &s;ix or &s;even per&s;ons, are liker to the Pope, and the Con&s;i&s;tory of his Cardinalls, becau&s;e of their Independency, then any of our Churches, which are all Dependents, and &s;ubject to Superiour Authority.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. pag.</HI> 79. &sect;. in his &s;econd An&s;wer, telleth me, That he cannot in|form
<PB N="108" REF="60">him&s;elf, 1. What <HI>A. S.</HI> means by Authoritative power. 2. Or from whence our Churches have it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I have 1, fully declared in my <HI>Annotations,</HI> and here above, what it is. 2. And from whence it proceedeth.</P>
<P>It is a Mini&s;teriall power to command &s;uch as are &s;ubject thereunto, which bindeth, or obligeth them to obedience, and whereby, in ca&s;e of di&s;obedi|ence, they may inflict Spirituall puni&s;hments. It is of God, or from God; and therefore lawfull; Now whether it be of God, as <HI>Author of Nature, or of Grace,</HI> by the Law of Nature, or any Po&s;itive Law, Naturall, or Super|naturall; it is not a Que&s;tion <HI>de re: &s;ed de modo rei,</HI> not of the thing it &s;elf, but of the manner thereof. Grant me, either that it is lawfull, or deny it; If it be a lawfull power, it is of God, for there is no lawfull power, but of God, <HI>Rom.</HI> 13.2. Grant me the thing, and afterwards I &s;hall di&s;pute with you, <HI>de modo rei.</HI> They have it not of the <HI>Parliament,</HI> nor of the <HI>State,</HI> as you pretend; for &s;ecular men cannot give any Spirituall power into the Church; they have it of God, and by Gods Word, <HI>direct&egrave;,</HI> or <HI>per con&s;equen|tiam;</HI> and in &s;ome things, <HI>per non repugnantiam.</HI></P>
<P>It is an untruth in <HI>M. S.</HI> in his third An&s;wer, whereas he &s;ayeth, that I &s;eem to imply, That the Church hath this power from the Law of the <HI>State;</HI> for howbeit, the Civill Magi&s;trate, by his Laws put a Politicall Obligation up|on Chri&s;tians, to obey the Churches Spirituall Authority, which is from God; yet is not his Civill Authority the cau&s;e of the Churches Spirituall Authority, or of the Obligation, whereby a Chri&s;tian is bound to obey the Church; for howbeit, there were no Civill Magi&s;trate; or howbeit, he &s;hould di&s;&s;ent from &s;uch an Obedience, yet &s;hould the Church have Spirituall power; and all the Members of the Church in a Spirituall way &s;hould be bound to Obedience: But what then doth the Civill Magi&s;trates Law? <HI>An&s;w.</HI> It puts a new Bond or Obligation upon the Members of the Church, and bindes them again, by a Civill Authority, Extrin&s;ecall to the Church, to a Spirituall Obedience, who heretofore were onely bound by a Spirituall Obligation; &s;o he bindes them to a Spirituall Obedience, but not &s;piritually, as the Church Authority doth, but onely materially, and that by Civill Authority: So the Mini&s;ters of the Go&s;pel, (or rather God by them) oblige and binde the Subjects in the <HI>State,</HI> in a Spirituall way, by Gods Word, to obey the Civill Magi&s;trate, or Politicall and Civill Obedience, but not <HI>Politically,</HI> or <HI>Civilly;</HI> but <HI>Spiritually:</HI> &s;o it followeth not, That the Civill Magi&s;trate hath power to form Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government: onely it followeth, That in a Politicall way, he may oblige, or binde men to obey it. No more followeth it, that I re&s;olve Church Govern|ment into the humors, wills, and plea&s;ures of the World, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Onely it follow|eth, That the Civill Obligation, laid upon men, to obey the Church, &s;o far forth as Civill, mu&s;t be finally re&s;olved into the Civill Magi&s;trates power, and not into his humours, as <HI>M. S.</HI> mo&s;t contemptuou&s;ly &s;peaketh of him.</P>
<PB N="109" REF="60">
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his fourth An&s;wer is in retorting my Arguments. 1. What if a <HI>Par|ticular Congregation,</HI> under the juri&s;diction of your <HI>Elder&s;hip,</HI> reflecting upon the <HI>Oath</HI> or <HI>Covenant</HI> it hath taken for &s;ubjection thereunto, as likewi&s;e upon all other ingagements that way, as unlawfull, &s;hall peremptorily refu&s;e to &s;tand to the awards or determinations of it, what will you do in this Ca&s;e? Will you Excommunicate this <HI>Church?</HI> The Apologi&s;ts, in their way do little le&s;&s;e; or will you deliver them, <HI>brachio &s;eculari?</HI> To be hampered, and taught better then it &s;eemeth you can teach them by Pri&s;ons, Fines, Bani&s;h|ments, <HI>&amp;c. Churches had need take heed how they chu&s;e men for their guardi|ans,</HI> that will &s;o di&s;po&s;e of them, if they plea&s;e them not.</P>
<P N="2">2. And what if in the <HI>Se&s;&s;ion</HI> of your <HI>combined Elder&s;hip,</HI> there be no &s;uch thing as Pluralitie of Votes, concerning the Excommunication of &s;uch a <HI>Church?</HI> Is not the <HI>remedy</HI> you &s;peak of now in the du&s;t?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> To the fir&s;t Quaere, I an&s;wer, That we mu&s;t do by Spirituall power in the <HI>Church,</HI> that, that the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> doth by the &s;ecular power in the <HI>State,</HI> in &s;uch a Ca&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. The Mini&s;ters in the New Te&s;tament mu&s;t proceed &s;piritually again&s;t all Delinquent, and Impenitent per&s;ons; as the Mini&s;ters in the Old Te&s;tament did again&s;t theirs, according to Gods Word, unle&s;&s;e &s;uch a proceeding be abrogated in the New Te&s;tament.</P>
<P N="3">3. They mu&s;t do as <HI>M. S.</HI> hath taught us, as they do again&s;t particular per&s;ons, in commen&s;urating the puni&s;hments to the &s;ins. <HI>i. e.</HI> They mu&s;t pro|ceed by particular Admonitions, and Cen&s;ures again&s;t le&s;&s;er &s;ins in private, or before the <HI>Presbytery;</HI> by &s;u&s;pen&s;ion from the Lords Table, again&s;t greater &s;ins; by publike &s;u&s;pen&s;ion or le&s;&s;er Excommunication, again&s;t greater &s;ins; and by the great Excommunication, again&s;t the greate&s;t &s;ins.</P>
<P N="4">4. <HI>M. S.</HI> confe&s;&s;eth, That the Apologi&s;ts in their way do little le&s;&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> If &s;o, then they do a little wor&s;e then the <HI>Presbyterians,</HI> and &s;o they quit a little <HI>M. S.</HI> his own rule, whereby he willeth them to proceed, as again&s;t particular Per&s;ons.</P>
<P N="5">5. If all this &s;uffice not, it is the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trates</HI> part to proceed again&s;t them, as Troublers of the Peace of the <HI>Church,</HI> and con&s;equently of the <HI>Chri&s;tian State,</HI> and not to permit them to erect a new Sect, as it is ordinari|ly practi&s;ed among&s;t the Independents of <HI>New England.</HI></P>
<P N="6">6. They mu&s;t be puni&s;hed for their Perjury, and for the breach of their <HI>Covenant;</HI> but none of tho&s;e puni&s;hments can be inflicted, but after &s;uffici|ent conviction, at lea&s;t Morally, <HI>in foro externo:</HI> And &s;uch puni&s;hments are the fitte&s;t for them, after &s;uch a conviction, when they pertinaciou&s;ly re&s;i&s;t the Spirit of God; for &s;uch men fear more the Gibbet, then Hell-fire. What you &s;ay of your &s;econd Chapter, it is &s;ufficiently an&s;wered; What you &s;ay of <HI>Churches, That they had need to take heed, how they chu&s;e men for their Guardi|ans,</HI> &amp;c. If by tho&s;e Guardians you mean the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> it is not
<PB N="110" REF="61">wi&s;ely &s;aid of you; If Church-Mini&s;ters, they mu&s;t choo&s;e &s;uch, as will delate pertinacious &s;inners to the Civill Magi&s;trate.</P>
<P>To your &s;econd Que&s;tion, <HI>What if in the Se&s;&s;ion, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. What if it be &s;o in your A&s;&s;emblies or Synods? 2. If it be any inferior Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatory, they mu&s;t remit it to a &s;uperior, ever till they come to &s;ome, wherein the Votes may preponderate: And if in the &s;u|preme Iudicatory, viz. in a Nationall A&s;&s;embly, the Votes preponderate not concerning the Excommunication of &s;uch a Church, (which is very extraordi|nary) &s;he cannot be excommunicated; and yet if her opinion, or &s;in be con|demned, the combined Elder&s;hip may inflict &s;ome le&s;&s;er Spirituall puni&s;hment; and if &s;uch a Church continue &s;till pertinacious, the Civill Magi&s;trate may pro|ceed again&s;t her in a Civill way, as we have &s;aid. Neither is this a compliance with <HI>Papi&s;ts, in quality of Papi&s;ts,</HI> but in &s;o far forth as they agree with Scrip|ture; 1. For &s;o proceeded the Church of the Old Te&s;tament; 2. So procee|ded the Church of the New Te&s;tament, in the times of good <HI>Emperours,</HI> as under <HI>Con&s;tantine</HI> the Great, <HI>Theodo&s;ius,</HI> &amp;c. 3. So proceed they at <HI>Geneva.</HI> 4. So in the <HI>Netherlands.</HI> 5. So the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>New-England.</HI> 6. So &s;hould M.S. rather doe, then to tolerate open Bla&s;phemers of the ble&s;&s;ed Name of God. 7. Dare&s;t thou, <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;o openly plead in favour of Pagani&s;me of all &s;orts of Here&s;ies, and mi&s;chiefs, and for all &s;ort of impunitie for them all?, 8. The Truth falleth not to the du&s;t in &s;uch a ca&s;e, but &s;inne is puni&s;hed, but not in &s;uch a degree as it &s;hould be.</P>
<P>To the &s;econd Inconveniency that I object again&s;t the Independents, &sect;. 4. viz. That the <HI>Independent Churches</HI> offended, if they judge the <HI>offending Church,</HI> they &s;hould be both <HI>Judge</HI> and <HI>Party.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> replieth, p. 80. &sect;. 3. When your <HI>combined Elder&s;hip</HI> proceedeth a|gain&s;t a particular Church among&s;t you, upon offence taken, is not this <HI>Elder|&s;hip</HI> as well <HI>Party,</HI> as <HI>Judge?</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> My Argument implieth the Solution of this Objection, viz. That the <HI>combined Elder&s;hip</HI> cannot be Party, in &s;uch a cau&s;e, becau&s;e it hath an <HI>Authori|tative power</HI> over the particular Church, (howbeit Spirituall and Mini&s;teriall) as the <HI>Parliament</HI> over particular Judicatories in the Kingdome: but Parties look one to another as <HI>par parem,</HI> and not as <HI>&s;uperior inferiorem.</HI> 2. Neither can any man, or Con&s;ociation take his ordinary Judge to Party, unle&s;&s;e he have &s;ome particular Exceptions again&s;t him. 3. I propound you the &s;ame Que&s;tion concerning the particular Tribes, and the Synagogicall Judicatories among&s;t the people of God in the Old Te&s;tament, when the great <HI>Sanedrim</HI> took of|fence at them, or at their Iudgements; whether the great Sanedrim was not both Iudge and Party? Or rather, whether under the notion of Offence ta|ken, it was not to be con&s;idered as a Party, and under the notion of Authori|tative power, as a Iudge? 4. I propound it of the State, whether the <HI>Parlia|ment</HI> may not be con&s;idered as <HI>Party,</HI> being offended at any <HI>particular Con|&s;ociation,</HI>
<PB N="111" REF="61">and as <HI>Judge,</HI> in quality of the <HI>Repre&s;entative Body</HI> of the whole <HI>King|dome:</HI> or if it be evermore needfull, that &s;ome particular Per&s;on or Per&s;ons compeare in quality of Party again&s;t particular Con&s;ociations or Townes. 5. In your particular Congregations, may not your Church, under divers noti|ons, be con&s;idered as Judge and Party? or may every Delinquent take your whole <HI>Presbytery</HI> or <HI>Congregation</HI> to Party. 6. Did not the Arminians &s;erve them&s;elves of this Independent Argument, again&s;t the Synod of <HI>Dort,</HI> to de|cline the Synods power? and were not both they, and this their Argument condemned by the judgement of the Synod, as very ab&s;urd and unapt? 7. This Argument concludeth again&s;t all the &s;uperior Powers of this World.</P>
<P>Again, <HI>M.S.</HI> 1. telleth us, that this Authoritative power of combined Presby|teries over Congregations is not from above. <HI>A. S.</HI> But we have proved it to be from above, and from God, as <HI>Author</HI> of <HI>Nature,</HI> and of <HI>Grace.</HI> See the Que|&s;tion concerning the <HI>Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories.</HI> 2. <HI>Core, Da|than,</HI> and <HI>Abiram</HI> objected no le&s;&s;e again&s;t <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> and <HI>Aaron:</HI> yea, as much may be objected again&s;t God him&s;elfe, who is Iudge and Party; and Ie&s;us Chri&s;t, who is Party, and yet &s;hall judge the quick and the dead: For if Cri|minals may &s;o e&s;cape, they will not faile to take their Iudges evermore for Party.</P>
<P>M. S. To hold, that all tho&s;e that have an <HI>Authoritative Power</HI> over men, may lawfully, in vertue of &s;uch a Power, be both Iudges and Parties, is to exalt all manner of Tyranny, &amp;c. by Law: for &s;o in Church, and State, men inve&s;ted with &s;uch a power, may be their own carvers, and &s;erve them&s;elves of the e&s;tates, liberties and lives of tho&s;e that are under them, how, and when, and as oft as they li&s;t: <HI>Adde, But the Con&s;equence is fal&s;e,</HI> Ergo, <HI>&s;o is the Ante|cedent.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> I deny the Con&s;equence; for they have not an ab&s;olute, but a limited power, according to Law, and not to their own particular, but publike will, or in quality of publike per&s;ons, who&s;e wills are declared in, or re&s;trained ac|cording to Law. Neither commandeth <HI>Carolus</HI> the Kingdome, <HI>qua Carolus,</HI> but <HI>qua Rex,</HI> or <HI>qua Carolus Rex, &amp; Lex viva:</HI> and under this notion, he is not his own carver, but the Law carveth for him, and us both; neither can he &s;erve him&s;elfe of other mens E&s;tates, &amp;c. but in &s;o far as the Law permitteth him: But how much the Law permitteth him, it is not for every particular per&s;on, nor for every particular and inferior Iudicatory to define it; for Infe|riors, <HI>qua tales,</HI> cannot judge their Superiors, at lea&s;t ordinarily; and in &s;uch a ca&s;e, they remaine no more Inferiors, but become Superiors.</P>
<P>To the 3. Inconveniencie, which I note, &sect;. 9. <HI>M.S.</HI> retorteth it in this man|ner: Tell me plainly and di&s;tinctly, what Power more your Government giveth <HI>to a thou&s;and Churches over one, then to a Tinker, or the Hangman over a thou&s;and.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S. An&s;w.</HI> When they are repre&s;ented in a Repre&s;entative Church, they
<PB N="112" REF="62">have a &s;pirituall Authoritative power over all the Churches that they repre|&s;en, both <HI>Collectiv&egrave;,</HI> and every one of them <HI>Di&s;tributiv&egrave;;</HI> which no Tinker or Hangman hath, either over many, or any one of them; for they have no Authoritative power at all. But among&s;t the Independents, a thou&s;and Churches, whether they be taken <HI>Di&s;tributiv&egrave;,</HI> or <HI>Collectiv&egrave;,</HI> repre&s;enting all their par|ticular Congregations, have no Authoritative power at all; and con&s;equently, no more then a Tinker or a Hangman.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> What makes you think, that the Government of the Apologi&s;ts <HI>gives no more power to a thou&s;and Churches over one, then to a Tinker or Hangman o|ver a thou&s;and? &V;bi, quando, quibus te&s;tibus,</HI> did this Government, or any Son it hath, ever make any &s;uch compari&s;on?</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. I &s;ay not that you make any &s;uch compari&s;on, but only I deduce it out of your Tenets by nece&s;&s;ary con&s;equence. 2. Neither doe you deny my con&s;equence, you grant it freely, and tell me, that it is no di&s;paragement for a thou&s;and Churches, that a <HI>Tinker,</HI> or a <HI>Hangman</HI> have as much <HI>Authoritative power</HI> over them all, as they have all over any particular Church. And to con|firme it, you bring me no Rea&s;on, nor Scripture, but two Te&s;timonies; the fir&s;t of <HI>Charron;</HI> who &s;aith, <HI>That every Humane Propo&s;ition hath equall autho|rity, if Rea&s;on make not the difference:</HI> To which I an&s;wer, 1. That this is but an Humane Authority; 2. Of a Papi&s;t; 3. And, as many in <HI>France</HI> think, of an Athei&s;t; 4. And yet it may be granted in this &s;en&s;e, viz. That it hath as much Naturall, but not &s;o much Morall authority: for the&s;e be Maximes in Nature, and in Rea&s;on; <HI>Magis credendum pluribus qu&agrave;m paucioribus, te&s;timonio publico qu&agrave;m privato, &s;apientibus quam in&s;ipientibus, peritis quam imperitis, videntibus qu&agrave;m audientibus: Plus valet oculatus te&s;tis unus, qu&agrave;m auriti decem.</HI> 5. I an|&s;wer, that every <HI>Humane Propo&s;ition</HI> hath <HI>equall authority</HI> according to the <HI>&s;pecies</HI> of its <HI>authority,</HI> but not according to the <HI>degrees</HI> thereof; as all <HI>white colours</HI> are equally <HI>white</HI> according to their <HI>&s;pecies,</HI> (&s;ince the definition of <HI>white</HI> belongeth equally to them all; unle&s;&s;e you &s;ay, that <HI>Album e&s;t genus analogum re&s;pectu hujus &amp; i&s;tius, magis &amp; minus albi:</HI> which no true Philo&s;opher, to my knowledge, ever granted:) But not according to the <HI>graduall latitude of per|fection</HI> conteined within the <HI>species</HI> of <HI>Whitene&s;&s;e.</HI> 6. And here I ask of <HI>M.S.</HI> whether he thinketh that a <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> of <HI>Indas,</HI> and of S. <HI>Peter,</HI> or <HI>Adam</HI> be|fore his fall, be all of equall authority? Item, Whether a Propo&s;ition of <HI>A|dam</HI> before his fall, and after his fall, be of equall authority? Item, Whether a Propo&s;ition of Chri&s;t, <HI>qua homo,</HI> or as proceeding from his Humane Nature, be of no more authority, then that which proceeds from <HI>Simon</HI> the Magician. If I had lea&s;ure here to di&s;pute about the foundation of <HI>Authority,</HI> I might &s;hew many ab&s;urdities and impertinencies in this Propo&s;ition, in <HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;en&s;e; but I mu&s;t be briefe. The &s;econd Authority is of <HI>Ger&s;on,</HI> and is this: <HI>The &s;aying of a &s;imple man, and no wayes authorized, if he be well &s;een in the Scriptures, is rather to be believed then the Popes own determination.</HI> But this Propo&s;ition is
<PB N="113" REF="62">not again&s;t me; for a man well &s;een in Scriptures, <HI>qua talis,</HI> &s;peaketh accor|ding to Gods Word, and is &s;ome wayes authorized by it; but the Popes De|termination without Gods Word, is meerly Humane, yea, ordinarily pa&s;&s;i|onate.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> confe&s;&s;eth ingenuou&s;ly, that I propound many more <HI>Inconveniencies</HI> again&s;t <HI>Independencie;</HI> but out of mode&s;ty, he will not an&s;wer them; Only here I note, that <HI>M.S.</HI> in all this his Di&s;cour&s;e, an&s;wereth very little to my Arguments, and objecteth rather again&s;t our Doctrine, then ju&s;tifieth his own: And to elude my Arguments, pretends evermore ignorance of things that are mo&s;t ea&s;ie, and obvious to all men, which neverthele&s;&s;e I expound mo&s;t cleerly: &s;ometimes he contemneth them, as unworthy of any Solution; which is a very odde, and new Independent way, <HI>a la mode.</HI></P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="5" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. V. M. S.</HI> his fir&s;t two Rea&s;ons for Independency, with the Solutions thereof.</HEAD>
<P>M. <HI>S.</HI> with other Independents, prove their Independent Government of every particular Congregation, by &s;ome frivilous Rea&s;ons. The fir&s;t is this: If a &s;ingle Congregation being &s;olitary, and without Neigh|bours, hath entirene&s;&s;e of Juri&s;diction. <HI>Ergo,</HI> every &s;ingle Congregation hath it. But the fir&s;t is true, according to the Presbyterians Confe&s;&s;ion. <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;o mu&s;t the &s;econd be al&s;o.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I deny the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition, or rather di&s;tingui&s;h it in this manner. If a &s;ingle Congregation have entirene&s;&s;e of Iuri&s;diction <HI>ab&s;olutely,</HI> it is true; but then the A&s;&s;umption, or &s;econd <HI>Propo&s;ition</HI> is fal&s;e. If a &s;ingle Congre|gation have it <HI>&s;ecundum quid,</HI> viz. In ca&s;e of Solitarine&s;&s;e, as it is expre&s;&s;ed in the fir&s;t <HI>Propo&s;ition,</HI> or in ca&s;e of any other nece&s;&s;ity, that hindereth its con|&s;ociation with Neighbour Churches, as di&s;tance of place, per&s;ecution, &amp;c. then all other particular Churches mu&s;t have it, in the &s;ame ca&s;e; it is true: But I deny that &s;uch is the ca&s;e of all &s;ingle Congregations, for they are not all remote from all Neighbourhood of other Churches; nor are they all hindered by per&s;ecution, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> But when a &s;olitary Congregation hath an entire <HI>Juri&s;diction,</HI> then certainly it hath a lawfull right, title, or claime to it. <HI>Ergo,</HI> She hath it e|vermore.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. She hath a lawfull right by a generall Law of nece&s;&s;ity, whereby it is ordained, that when we have not all the be&s;t helps that are nece&s;&s;ity to do the be&s;t, we are then to &s;erve our &s;elves with the be&s;t we can, and &s;uch as we have at hand to &s;erve God by: So if we have not Wine to celebrate the Lords Supper with, we may celebrate it with &s;ome other liquour mo&s;t u&s;uall for drinke; and there is an Article in the <HI>French</HI> Di&s;cipline, whereby it is per|mitted to any man, that cannot drinke wine, to communicate in participa|ting
<PB N="114" REF="63">only of the Bread: So if men be ca&s;t upon any I&s;land, very remote from the Continent, and have none among&s;t them endowed with &s;ufficient abili|ties to preach, or teach them, they may chu&s;e the able&s;t (howbeit he be not ab&s;olutely able enough) to preach, rather then to live without Gods Ordi|nances altogether: So <HI>David,</HI> wanting Bread, did eate of the <HI>Shew-bread;</HI> and a man, in ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity, may take other mens meate, and eate it, ra|ther then &s;tarve. 2. I di&s;tingui&s;h the Con&s;equent: &s;he hath it evermore, in &s;uch a cau&s;e, <HI>i. e.</HI> in ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity, when &s;he can have no help of Neigh|bour Churches. I grant it all, otherwayes I deny it.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> de&s;ireth to know, by what right Neighbour <HI>Churches,</HI> by their pre&s;ence, can take &s;uch a right from her.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Neighbour <HI>Churches</HI> by their pre&s;ence take no right from her, but by their Neighbour-hood give her, or rather adde unto her a new right, to Rule her &s;elfe more perfectly, and to help to Rule Neighbour <HI>Churches</HI> al&s;o, which &s;he could not do before; &s;o it is not <HI>Juri&s;dictionis diminutio, &s;ed ampliatio,</HI> it is no diminution, but an augmentation of power <HI>inten&s;iv&egrave;,</HI> or in certitude within her &s;elfe, and <HI>exten&s;iv&egrave;,</HI> in re&s;pect of other <HI>Churches:</HI> &s;o it is a Ble&s;|&s;ing of God, added to that <HI>Church,</HI> and no power or abilitie, but a lacke of power, a weakene&s;&s;e, an unpowerfulne&s;&s;e (as I may &s;o &s;ay) and infirmity ta|ken away; it is not to take away what &s;he had, but to give her a power or helpe, that &s;he had not, being alone; Even &s;o as when two or three Regi|ments coming to joyn with one, or two others again&s;t their common Enemy, the&s;e two or three Regiments take no power or force from the one, or the two precedent Regiments, but help them, and make them more able to beate the Enemy.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. Tho&s;e that God hath put together, let not man put a&s;under;</HI> But God put together a &s;ingle <HI>Congregation,</HI> and an entire Iuri&s;diction. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> That Text in the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition is to be expounded of tho&s;e onely that are put together by <HI>Marriage,</HI> but if you take it Univer&s;ally, it will be found fal&s;e; for God hath put a <HI>Tree,</HI> and the Branches thereof together, and yet I trow you will not &s;ay, a man may not cut a Branch off from a <HI>Tree.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. I an&s;wer, if God hath put them together in all ca&s;es, it is true, but the Minor is fal&s;e: If God hath onely put them together in &s;ome particular <HI>Ca&s;e,</HI> then they may be &s;eparated in an other <HI>Ca&s;e.</HI></P>
<P N="3">3. I an&s;wer to the <HI>Minor;</HI> If by an <HI>entire Iuri&s;diction,</HI> be meant a <HI>&s;upreme Mini&s;teriall Juri&s;diction</HI> ab&s;olutely, &s;uch as &s;hould be in <HI>Synods,</HI> to the well-being of the <HI>Church,</HI> it is fal&s;e, for it wants a <HI>Synodall Juri&s;diction:</HI> If by an <HI>entire Iuri&s;diction</HI> be meant <HI>entire, &s;ecundum quid, in &s;uo genere, &amp; per accidens,</HI> in &s;ome way, in its own kind, and by Accident, it is true; for &s;uch a
<PB N="115" REF="63">Iuri&s;diction is onely <HI>Congregationall</HI> or <HI>Con&s;i&s;toriall,</HI> and &s;o perfect in that <HI>kinde,</HI> and <HI>&s;upreme</HI> by <HI>accident,</HI> for want of Neighbour Churches; &s;o it is entire in that <HI>kinde,</HI> but not <HI>ab&s;olutely,</HI> as it &s;hould be in Ca&s;e of Neighbour Churches.</P>
<P>Ma&s;ter <HI>Mather,</HI> and Ma&s;ter <HI>Thom&s;on,</HI> in their An&s;wer to Ma&s;ter <HI>Herle,</HI> argue thus: The <HI>power</HI> that <HI>floweth immediately,</HI> and <HI>nece&s;&s;arily</HI> from the very <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> of a <HI>Church, cannot</HI> be <HI>&s;eparated</HI> from the <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> of a <HI>particular Church:</HI> But &s;uch an entire power of Iuri&s;diction <HI>floweth</HI> from the very <HI>E&s;&s;ence of a Church. Ergo,</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I deny the <HI>Minor;</HI> for that, which belongeth to any thing, <HI>ex in&s;tituto, floweth</HI> not from its <HI>E&s;&s;ence:</HI> But &s;o it is of the <HI>entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Juri&s;|diction;</HI> it belongeth not to the <HI>Church</HI> by <HI>nature,</HI> but by <HI>will,</HI> and <HI>Law, viz.</HI> by Gods Ordinance. 2. If it <HI>flowed nece&s;&s;arily</HI> from the very <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> of every <HI>Church,</HI> then could not God <HI>change</HI> it; for God cannot <HI>de&s;troy</HI> nor <HI>change</HI> the proper <HI>Accidents,</HI> or take them away from their <HI>&s;ubjects:</HI> But the <HI>con&s;equent</HI> is <HI>fal&s;e;</HI> for &s;ince Iuri&s;diction belongs to the <HI>Church</HI> by Gods freewill, he may as freely take it away from the <HI>Church,</HI> and <HI>change</HI> it, as he be&s;towed it upon the <HI>Church.</HI> 3. Yea, God hath actually changed it; for all the <HI>Militant Churches,</HI> &s;ince the <HI>fall of Adam, viz.</HI> Before the <HI>Law,</HI> under the <HI>Law,</HI> and under the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> are of the &s;ame <HI>nature,</HI> and <HI>Species,</HI> or the &s;ame in <HI>&s;ub&s;tance,</HI> and onely <HI>differ</HI> in <HI>Circum&s;tances;</HI> and yet they have had <HI>divers &s;orts of Iu|ri&s;diction,</HI> and <HI>Governments,</HI> which <HI>could not</HI> be, if it <HI>flowed immediately and nece&s;&s;arily from its E&s;&s;ence.</HI> 4. Put the Ca&s;e, it <HI>flowed</HI> from its <HI>E&s;&s;ence,</HI> as it doth not; yet this <HI>entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>juri&s;diction</HI> &s;hould onely be <HI>entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Con&s;i&s;torian</HI> or <HI>Parochiall juri&s;diction,</HI> which is entire in its own <HI>kinde,</HI> but not of <HI>Synodall juri&s;diction,</HI> yea, not &s;o much, as of your <HI>Synodall</HI> power, in defining dogmatically the points of <HI>Doctrine.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;econd Argument, If a <HI>Church,</HI> yet &s;ingle, be inve&s;ted with a power of <HI>juri&s;diction,</HI> within it &s;elf, and &s;hould be ca&s;hiered of this power, by the ri&s;ing up of more <HI>Churches</HI> neer unto her, then that which is intended by God, as a Table, &s;hould become a &s;nare unto her; &s;he &s;hould &s;uffer lo&s;&s;e, and have &s;orrow from tho&s;e, by whom &s;he ought to be comforted. But the fir&s;t is true. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I deny the <HI>Con&s;equence;</HI> neither hath <HI>M. S.</HI> proved it: The Rea&s;on of this my Negation is, becau&s;e &s;he is not <HI>en&s;nared,</HI> but drawn out of the <HI>&s;nare</HI> by the ri&s;ing of &s;uch <HI>Churches</HI> which can help her, and coun&s;ell her, and reform her Iudgements, conjunctly with her &s;elf, in ca&s;e of aberration; neither &s;hould this be any ju&s;t matter of &s;orrow unto her; if &s;he &s;hould &s;orrow at it, her &s;orrow &s;hould be unju&s;t, and wicked, and at Gods Ordi|nance.</P>
<P N="2">2. I deny the <HI>A&s;&s;umption,</HI> for the <HI>Con&s;i&s;torian power,</HI> that &s;uch a &s;ingle <HI>Church</HI> had before the ri&s;ing of &s;uch <HI>Neighbour Churches,</HI> is not ca&s;hiered by
<PB N="116" REF="64">their ri&s;ing, but a more eminent, <HI>viz.</HI> A <HI>Cla&s;&s;icall</HI> or <HI>Synodall Power,</HI> which &s;he had not, is &s;uperadded unto her <HI>Con&s;i&s;torian,</HI> or <HI>Parochiall power,</HI> where|by it is mightily perfected.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="6" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VI.</HI> M. S. his third Rea&s;on an&s;wered.</HEAD>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> THirdly, If a &s;ingle <HI>Church</HI> &s;hould &s;uffer lo&s;&s;e of &s;o con&s;iderable a priviledge, as <HI>entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Juri&s;diction</HI> is, by the multiplication of <HI>Churches</HI> neer unto her, then cannot this <HI>Church</HI> pray for the Propagation of the <HI>Go&s;pel</HI> in places neer to it; but &s;he mu&s;t pray again&s;t her own comfort, and peace, which is a fore temptation upon her, either to pray very faintly, or not to pray at all for &s;uch a thing. But the con&s;equent is fal&s;e. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I deny the <HI>con&s;equence</HI> of the fir&s;t <HI>Propo&s;ition;</HI> for the rule and mea|&s;ure of our Prayers, is not our <HI>priviledge</HI> and <HI>juri&s;diction,</HI> but Gods glory and the Salvation of our &s;ouls, revealed in Scripture, which may be very well obtained without any power of <HI>juri&s;diction,</HI> as we &s;ee in Women; and it &s;eems, that <HI>M. S.</HI> will not pray for the pro&s;perity of <HI>Jeru&s;alem,</HI> unle&s;&s;e God grant him an <HI>Independent power</HI> of <HI>juri&s;diction</HI> therein.</P>
<P N="2">2. I deny the <HI>A&s;&s;umption,</HI> for by the multiplication of <HI>Neighbour Churches,</HI> that &s;ingle <HI>Church</HI> &s;uffers no lo&s;&s;e of the <HI>Parochiall juri&s;diction,</HI> that &s;he had, for &s;he retains it; but &s;he receiveth more power in becoming a part of a Cla&s;&s;e, and &s;o receiveth in part a <HI>Cla&s;&s;icall power</HI> of <HI>juri&s;diction,</HI> whereby the <HI>Parochiall power,</HI> which formerly &s;he had, is more &s;ure, and made le&s;&s;e &s;ubject to aberration, then it was before: So her <HI>juri&s;diction</HI> is not impaired, but improved; neither in it &s;elf &s;hould it be a temptation to you not to pray, or to pray faintly, as you &s;ay, &s;ince &s;uch an Improvement to every good Chri&s;tian ought to be matter of Thank&s;giving.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> But <HI>entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Government,</HI> or &s;ubjection onely to tho&s;e, that are of the &s;ame &s;ociety, is a &s;peciall mercy: <HI>And their Nobles &s;hall be of them|&s;elves</HI> (&s;aith God, &s;peaking of that great Goodne&s;&s;e he meant to &s;hew unto his people, after their return from <HI>Babylon</HI>) <HI>and their Governours &s;hall proceed from the mid&s;t of them, Jer.</HI> 20.21. So as it is made a Character of the pro|&s;perous E&s;tate of <HI>Tyrus, That her wi&s;e men, that were in her, i. e.</HI> of her own Nation, <HI>were her Pilots, Ezek.</HI> 27.8.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>Subjection</HI> unto Strangers, is &s;till &s;poken of as matter of puni&s;hment, and &s;orrow; <HI>Give not thine Inheritance to reproach, that the Heathen &s;hould reign over it, Joel</HI> 2.17. The Nation of the Iews were expre&s;ly forbidden to <HI>&s;et &s;trangers to rule over them: A.S.</HI> What follows? <HI>Ergo, Entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Govern|ment, i. e.</HI> An <HI>Independent Government</HI> in every <HI>particular Congregation,</HI> compounded of &s;even or eight &s;illy Fellows, whereof many of them are tender Foreheaded, and ba&s;hfull, as <HI>M. S.</HI> telleth us, <HI>pag.</HI> 74. is a mercy and ble&s;&s;ing of God.</P>
<PB N="117" REF="64">
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> The <HI>Antecedent</HI> is not univer&s;ally true, 1. For it is good for Families, Republikes, and Kingdoms, that cannot rule them&s;elves, that they be ruled by &s;ome others; and there are &s;ome people, as <HI>Ari&s;totle</HI> tels us, that are na|turally &s;ervile. <HI>Ergo,</HI> They have need to be ruled by others. And the <HI>Poloni|ans</HI> &s;ometimes chu&s;e Forraign Princes to rule over them: The <HI>Ragu&s;ians</HI> in <HI>Slavonia,</HI> to entertain perfect equality among&s;t them&s;elves, chu&s;e evermore a Stranger for their <HI>Bi&s;hop;</HI> and therefore hold it not evermore be&s;t, to be ruled by one of them&s;elves: So do they in &s;undry Elective Kingdoms.</P>
<P N="2">2. Howbeit I &s;hould grant, that it is ab&s;olutely be&s;t, yet &s;hould it not follow, that it is be&s;t for every &s;ort of Society, every where, and evermore; for then it &s;hould follow, 1. That it is not good, much le&s;&s;e be&s;t for us, that <HI>Ie&s;us Chri&s;t,</HI> who according to his Manhood, or the Apo&s;tles, who were Iews, &s;hould have been Univer&s;all Mini&s;ters over all the whole World, &s;ince they were not cho&s;en of every particular Kingdom; much le&s;&s;e of every Province, but lea&s;t of all, of every particular <HI>Independent Congregation</HI> compounded of &s;even or eight weak Fore-headed men, as <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;tiles them. 2. It &s;hould not be a ble&s;&s;ing of God, that the Crown of <HI>France</HI> &s;hould be &s;ubject to the Crown of <HI>England;</HI> for &s;o it &s;hould not be &s;ubject to a French man; &s;o we loo&s;e our right to the Crown of <HI>France.</HI> 3. It &s;hould have been a puni&s;hment to the people of God, to have been ruled by a King of one Tribe, <HI>viz.</HI> of <HI>Ben|jamine,</HI> as by <HI>Saul;</HI> or of <HI>Iudah,</HI> as by <HI>David, Solomon, Rehoboam, &amp;c.</HI> for they were not of all the Tribes, much le&s;&s;e of every particular Congre|gation of &s;even or eight per&s;ons. 4. This Maxime cannot &s;tand with the State of our three Crowns; for &s;o it el&s;e &s;hould be a ble&s;&s;ing to <HI>Ireland,</HI> to be ruled by one of the Iri&s;h Rebels, and a puni&s;hment to be &s;ubject to the Crown of <HI>England.</HI> 5. By that &s;ame rea&s;on the Kingdom of <HI>Scotland,</HI> and <HI>England,</HI> could not without &s;ome puni&s;hment or cur&s;e of God upon the one or the other, &s;ub&s;i&s;t in an Union together, unle&s;&s;e the King were both an Engli&s;h, and a Scotchman. 6. The <HI>Parliament</HI> could not be a ble&s;&s;ing, but a cur&s;e of God, &s;ince the Members thereof are from divers Provinces, Shires, and Burroughes, as the Members of our Nationall Synods. So let the World con&s;ider how Traiterous, how Hereticall, and bla&s;phemous this mo&s;t abomi|nable Maxime is, tending to the totall &s;ubver&s;ion of the <HI>Church, King, Parliament, State,</HI> and <HI>Kingdoms.</HI> 7. Yea, it overthroweth even their own Maximes; for their Synods are gathered of Members of different <HI>Churches,</HI> as ours are. 8. And finally, Howbeit I &s;hould grant him his Maxime; yet, as I have &s;aid, particular <HI>Congregations,</HI> by the increa&s;e and multiplication of <HI>Churches,</HI> and their combination in Synods, loo&s;e not their <HI>entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>juri&s;|diction,</HI> which they had before, <HI>viz.</HI> their <HI>Parochiall, Congregationall,</HI> or &s;im|ple <HI>Presbyteriall power,</HI> but retain it as formerly.</P>
<P>As for tho&s;e Texts of Scripture, 1. not one of them &s;ayes, that <HI>entirene&s;&s;e of Government</HI> within them&s;elves, is evermore <HI>be&s;t,</HI> and a <HI>mercy of God.</HI></P>
<PB N="118" REF="65">
<P N="2">2. Much le&s;&s;e, that <HI>entirene&s;&s;e of Government,</HI> within a petty <HI>Independent Church,</HI> compounded of &s;even or eight weak Foreheaded Fellows, is be&s;t for it; For if it were &s;o, we mu&s;t have as many little Popes in the <HI>Church,</HI> and as many Kings in the <HI>State,</HI> as there can be <HI>Independent Churches,</HI> or particular <HI>Iudicatories</HI> in the Kingdom.</P>
<P N="3">3. The pa&s;&s;age cited out of <HI>Ierem.</HI> 30.21. &s;peaketh of <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> as appeareth by the Text; for it is added, <HI>And I will cau&s;e him to draw neer, and he &s;hall approach unto me; For who is this, that engaged his heart to approach unto me, &s;aith the Lord:</HI> Now who is this, but Ie&s;us Chri&s;t? 1. But Chri&s;t was not a Governour of one particular Independent Church onely, but of them all; &s;o this place concludeth an Univer&s;all Church, in&s;tead of an Independent Congregation: 2. Neither can it be expounded of the people of the Iews, after the Captivity; for after it, they had no King from among&s;t them&s;elves, at lea&s;t ordinarily: For after the Captivity of <HI>Babylon, Zerobabel,</HI> and <HI>Ne|hemiah</HI> were, as it were Va&s;&s;als, to the King of <HI>Per&s;ia,</HI> even till <HI>E&s;dras</HI> ob|tained of <HI>Artaxerxes Longimanus,</HI> that they &s;hould &s;et it up again in form of a Republike. Afterwards, <HI>Alexander</HI> the Great, being pacified towards the lews, by the Interce&s;&s;ion of <HI>Jaddus,</HI> the High Prie&s;t, they obtained liber|ty to live after their own Laws: Afterwards <HI>Ptolomaeus,</HI> &s;on of <HI>Lagus,</HI> King of <HI>Egypt,</HI> having taken the City, u&s;ed them hardly: No better u&s;age got they afterwards under <HI>Antiochus Epiphanes,</HI> the eight King of <HI>Syria.</HI> Hither|to the Government was Ducall, and all their Dukes of the Hou&s;e of <HI>David,</HI> to the number of fifteen, from <HI>Zerobabel</HI> to <HI>Ianna:</HI> Afterwards, the Royall and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall power was in the hands of the Prie&s;ts, in the <HI>A&s;&s;amoneans</HI> Family, of the Tribe of <HI>Levi,</HI> the which Government was extraordinary, if not unlawfull; and then the divi&s;ion about the Royall and Sacerdo|tall power, betwixt the two Brethren, <HI>viz. Ari&s;tobulus,</HI> and <HI>Hircanus,</HI> who had recour&s;e to <HI>Pompey,</HI> &s;ome &s;ixty yeers before the coming of Chri&s;t, made them to be reduced under the power of the <HI>Romans;</HI> &s;o that this <HI>great ble&s;&s;ing</HI> of &s;o great a Governour, as is mentioned here, cannot be interpreted of any worldly Prince; or if it be &s;o, it is liker to the Presbyterian, then to the Independent Government; for the great Sanedrim was, as it were, our Nationall Synod; both taken from among&s;t their Brethren: So were the Rulers over Thou&s;ands, Hundreds, Fifties, and Tens, an&s;werable to our Provin|ciall Synods, Cla&s;&s;es, and &s;imple Presbyteries. Under <HI>Augu&s;tus,</HI> the Senate of <HI>Rome,</HI> made <HI>Herod,</HI> an <HI>Idumean,</HI> King of the Iews; And he, as afterward &s;ome of the Governours, and Procon&s;uls of <HI>Syria,</HI> made, and depo&s;ed the High Prie&s;ts, according to their plea&s;ure; &s;o that all this time almo&s;t, the <HI>Government</HI> of the Iews was ever <HI>Tyrannicall,</HI> and &s;o a <HI>puni&s;hment</HI> rather then any <HI>mercy</HI> of God here promi&s;ed.</P>
<P>As for the Text, <HI>Ezek.</HI> 27.8. it is not &s;aid, That all things that are here re|lated, are <HI>mercies of God;</HI> but that <HI>Tyrus gloried in them, Ver&s;.</HI> 3. 2. Neither
<PB N="119" REF="65">were they Governors of one Independent Con&s;ociation, as among&s;t the In|dependents: but here there were Superior and Inferior Iudicatories, as a|mong&s;t the Prote&s;tant Churches.</P>
<P>To that Text, <HI>Ioel</HI> 2.17. <HI>Give not thine heritage to reproach, that the Heathen &s;hould rule over them: Wherefore &s;hould they &s;ay among the people, Where is their God?</HI> I an&s;wer, This is only a Prayer, that the Heathen rule not over Gods people: and if there had been any of them tolerated among the people of God, as M. S. pretends, this Prayer would as well hold, as if they had not been a|mong&s;t them, but had lived as &s;trangers in other Countries: and it appeareth cleerly by the Rea&s;on that is added, <HI>Wherefore, &amp;c.</HI> i.e. le&s;t thy Name be di&s;|honoured by &s;uch reproaches, as if our God could not deliver us, or as if we had not a God to deliver us. And howbeit it were &s;o great a ble&s;&s;ing, ever|more to have Government within them&s;elves, yet can it not be meant of In|dependent Government in every Colledge or Con&s;ociation, without any &s;ub|ordination to &s;uperior Iudicatories, as M.S. hath to prove.</P>
<P>To the Text, <HI>Deut.</HI> 17.15. <HI>One from among&s;t thy Brethren thou &s;halt &s;et King over thee: thou maye&s;t not &s;et a Stranger over thee, which is not thy Brother.</HI> I an&s;wer, 1. That this is not a Morall, but a Po&s;itive Law; for in Elective Kingdomes they choo&s;e Strangers to be Kings, and in &s;o doing, they &s;inne not again&s;t the Morall, or the Law of Nature. 2. That this Commandement is only conditionall, grounded upon the condition conteined in the beginning of the Ver&s;e, viz. That only they &s;hould <HI>e&s;tabli&s;h him for King over them, whom the Lord their God &s;hould choo&s;e.</HI> 3. Neither was this Government <HI>independent</HI> in every Town, or particular Congregation; or without <HI>&s;ubordination,</HI> as among the <HI>Independents:</HI> but according to the Law of Nature and Grace, with &s;ome &s;ubordination and dependence of inferior Iudicatories upon &s;ome &s;uperior. 4. By a <HI>&s;tranger</HI> here, I beleeve, that he meanes principally a <HI>&s;tranger</HI> in Reli|gion; and con&s;equently, by habitation; becau&s;e it is added, <HI>that is not thy Brother:</HI> item, becau&s;e he was to have a copy of the <HI>Law, to read it, and learn to feare the Lord his God, to keep all the words thereof:</HI> which the Heathens could not doe. Or, 5. The rea&s;on may be, becau&s;e God was minded to tye the Crown to one Family, viz. to that of <HI>Iudah.</HI> 6. Neither was it lawfull for them to choo&s;e any Brother, or Countryman of theirs, but him only that was of the Tribe of <HI>Iudah,</HI> at lea&s;t, after the Promi&s;e made unto <HI>David;</HI> and that for a &s;peciall Rea&s;on, viz. to the end wee may know CHRISTS De|&s;cent, &amp;c.</P>
<P>After the&s;e &s;illy Objections that this M.S. hath brought, he objects to him&s;elf, But Pa&s;tors and Elders of neighbour Churches are not to be looked upon as Strangers, but as Brethren: (And he might have confirmed it; for <HI>there is no di&s;tinction betwixt the Iew and the Greek,</HI> Rom. 10.12.) and an&s;wers, That they are Brethren in re&s;pect of the unbelievers, and yet have more of the re|lation of Strangers to them, then tho&s;e that were (as it were) of the &s;ame do|me&s;tique
<PB N="120" REF="66">Society with them; and therefore <HI>&s;ubjection</HI> unto them mu&s;t have le&s;&s;e of the <HI>Ble&s;&s;ing,</HI> and more of the <HI>Cur&s;e,</HI> then Subjection to their own.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer, 1. in matter of Argumentation, to prove a Categoricall and Ab&s;olute Propo&s;ition, we u&s;e not the&s;e, <HI>as it were,</HI> or Metaphoricall termes; for they are <HI>termini diminuentes;</HI> and if it be only, <HI>as it were,</HI> Ergo it is not <HI>really.</HI> 2. I pray you, M.S. tell me, if a man, that is not of your Con|gregation, and hath more Faith, or at lea&s;t profe&s;&s;eth more then one of your Congregation, What rea&s;on, that he &s;hould rather be a &s;tranger unto you, or le&s;&s;e your Brother in Chri&s;t, then he who hath le&s;&s;e Faith? 3. Should not he, that hath a greater union with Chri&s;t, which undoubtedly he hath by his greater Faith, have a greater union with you? I &s;ee, that he &s;hall be lea&s;t be|loved of you, who is mo&s;t beloved of Chri&s;t, and of whom Chri&s;t is mo&s;t be|loved. 4. And &s;o you e&s;teem it a greater <HI>cur&s;e</HI> to be &s;ubject to tho&s;e who have more Faith, and a greater <HI>ble&s;&s;ing</HI> to be &s;ubject to &s;uch as have le&s;&s;e Faith, and haply none at all: <HI>Siccin&egrave; &s;oles beare Amicos?</HI></P>
<P>M. S. 3. <HI>Rea&s;on:</HI> The Grant of Government and Rule within them&s;elves, unto Townes and Corporations, was ever e&s;teemed a matter of &s;peciall Grace and favour from Princes, and hath &s;ometimes been purcha&s;ed with great &s;ums of money by the Inhabitants.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> What followeth? <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;o mu&s;t it be in the Church: if ye conclude any thing at all. 1. So you are the Di&s;ciples of <HI>Simon Magus.</HI> 2. That Grant of Government within them&s;elves was no Independent Government, as a|mong&s;t the Independent Churches; for then they mu&s;t have been Soveraigns. 3. I retort the Argument: In all &s;uch Priviledges of Incorporations, there is evermore a Subordination of Government, as among the Prote&s;tant Churches: <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;o &s;hould it be among you, if you will imitate them, or will have this Argument to make any thing at all for you. 4. Neither could it be a &s;peciall Grace, if it be independent; for Grace is only among&s;t the &s;uperior and the inferior, dependent upon his &s;uperior. 5. Such a Grace &s;hould take away the Subjects &s;ubjection, and &s;o of a Prince make no Prince; for no man is Prince, but he, upon whom the Subjects depend.</P>
</DIV3>
<DIV3 N="7" TYPE="chapter">
<HEAD><HI>CHAP. VII. M. S.</HI> his fourth Rea&s;on an&s;wered.</HEAD>
<P>M. S. FOurthly and la&s;tly, Rea&s;on it &s;elfe (faith he) demon&s;trates <HI>Entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of <HI>Government</HI> to be a <HI>&s;weet Priviledge</HI> and <HI>Benefit</HI> to a <HI>Particular Church.</HI></P>
<P>A. S. <HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. As if all he had &s;aid hitherto were without Rea&s;on, he now commeth to his Rea&s;ons, which are very irrationall. 2. It is <HI>&s;weet</HI> to the Fle&s;h, but not to the Spirit, if a man be lead by the Spirit of God. 3. If it be only a Priviledge, <HI>Ergo,</HI> its a cleer ca&s;e, you have it not by Law.</P>
<PB N="121" REF="66">
<P>M.S. 1. Rea&s;on to confirme this A&s;&s;ertion. Fir&s;t, in ca&s;e a man be que&s;tioned, he &s;aves a proportion both of time and labour, in re&s;pect of what he mu&s;t un|dergoe, if he were to make his An&s;wer at a Con&s;i&s;torie further off.</P>
<P>A. S. <HI>An&s;.</HI> 1. He an&s;wers fir&s;t in his own Pari&s;h, in his own particular Con&s;i&s;torie, and &s;o &s;aves his time. 2. But in ca&s;e he be there oppre&s;&s;ed, it is unju&s;t, that he &s;hould not have liberty to de&s;end him&s;elfe before another, viz. a <HI>Cla&s;&s;e,</HI> which happily may be holden in his own Town, or within one, two, or three miles of it; which is more tolerable to him, then to be oppre&s;&s;ed by Factions, as &s;undry times men are among&s;t the Independents, as appeareth by Mr. <HI>Edwards</HI> Relation of the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, touched in the <HI>Apologeticall Narration.</HI> 3. What if there fall out &s;ixe or &s;even &s;uch differences among your Churches, and that particular per&s;ons de&s;ire &s;ome redre&s;&s;e of their Grievances before a Synod among&s;t you? can ye not hold one Synod for five or &s;ixe &s;uch Com|plaints? Then in &s;uch a ca&s;e, they mu&s;t all goe to the Synod, out of their own Churches: and then even among&s;t your &s;elves ye find the &s;ame inconve|nience that ye object to us: If ye cannot, but for every &s;uch Grievance there mu&s;t be a particular Synod, and your Me&s;&s;engers of other Churches mu&s;t goe to the place; then many, in &s;tead of one, lo&s;e their time and labour. 4. This Rea&s;on beats down as well the Government of the State; And 5. the Go|vernment of the Church of the Iewes, which was e&s;tabli&s;hed by God him&s;elfe; And 6. the Proceedings of the Church of <HI>Antioch,</HI> as of Ours.</P>
<P>Secondly (&s;aith M.S.) the <HI>Proceedings</HI> again&s;t him in his own <HI>&s;ociaty,</HI> &s;hall be regulated, managed, and ordered by his own <HI>Pa&s;tor,</HI> who is a <HI>Father</HI> unto him in the Lord, and who in all rea&s;on, and according to the cour&s;e of almo&s;t all con&s;tant experience, is more tender, affectionate, and compa&s;&s;ionate to|wards him, then the <HI>Pa&s;tors</HI> of other <HI>Fhocks,</HI> and tho&s;e that are <HI>&s;trangers</HI> to him; <HI>Ergo,</HI> every man &s;hould be judged in his owne particular Congre|gation.</P>
<P>A.S. This Argument de&s;troyeth no le&s;&s;e the Civill, then the Church-Government; for &s;o it may be &s;aid, that a man being judged by the Iudge of his own &s;own, &s;hall be more tenderly dealt with then before the Kings Councell. 2. The Government of the Church of the Old Te&s;tament, as I have already declared. 3. The proceedings of the Church of <HI>Antioch,</HI> that &s;ent its <HI>Controver&s;ie</HI> to be judged at Hieru&s;alem. 4. That of the <HI>Independents</HI> them&s;elves, who in their Synods pretend to determine matters of Doctrine. 5. I deny the Antecedent; for when either the whole Church, or any mem|ber thereof hath any debate with their own Pa&s;tor, or two Pa&s;tors of one Church among&s;t them&s;elves, or two per&s;ons, or two Pa&s;tors of different Con|gregations, or two <HI>Churches</HI> are at odds one with another, that will not hold.</P>
<P N="6">6. The <HI>Pa&s;ter</HI> of the <HI>Congregation</HI> may affect more <HI>one</HI> of his own <HI>Congre|gation</HI> then <HI>another,</HI> and &s;o out of too much affection he may mi&s;cary. 7. Things
<PB N="122" REF="67">mu&s;t not be carried by <HI>tender affection,</HI> but by <HI>equity.</HI> 8. If his own <HI>Pa&s;tor</HI> be more <HI>tender-hearted</HI> towards him, he of another <HI>Congregation</HI> may be more <HI>indifferent,</HI> which of the two is more nece&s;&s;ary in a Iudge, that judgeth between two parties. 9. <HI>Pa&s;tors</HI> of other <HI>Flocks</HI> in a <HI>Synod</HI> are not altogether &s;trangers to him, &s;ince they are his Brethren, and his Fathers, in &s;o far forth as they re|pre&s;ent all the <HI>Churches</HI> of that <HI>Province</HI> or <HI>Nationall Synod.</HI> The Example of <HI>Pharaoh,</HI> that <HI>knew not Jo&s;eph,</HI> is very impertinent; for he was not a <HI>Pa&s;tor:</HI> and <HI>[know]</HI> there, is to <HI>acknowledge</HI> and <HI>affectionate</HI> a man: but <HI>all</HI> the <HI>Pa&s;tors</HI> of the Church, as I declared in my Ob&s;ervations, have power to <HI>preach</HI> in <HI>all</HI> the <HI>militant Church;</HI> and therefore are <HI>Fathers</HI> in the <HI>whole Church</HI> accor|ding to their <HI>generall Vocation;</HI> &s;o was none of tho&s;e Pharaohs. 10. In fir&s;t In|&s;tance a man hath all that you de&s;ire before his <HI>Pa&s;tor.</HI></P>
<P>Thirdly <HI>M.S.</HI> in &s;ub&s;tance &s;aith, that he &s;hall be tryed and &s;entenced by tho&s;e, who may be tryed, and &s;entenced by him againe, <HI>which</HI> will teach them more moderation, <HI>then</HI> a Con&s;i&s;tory <HI>of &s;tanding</HI> Iudges, <HI>Ergo</HI> he mu&s;t be onely judged in his <HI>owne Congregation.</HI></P>
<P>A. S. This Argument concludeth 1. again&s;t the Subordination of Iudicato|ries in the State. 2. Again&s;t all &s;orts of Courts, wherein he that is &s;entenced, cannot &s;entence his Iudges againe. 3. Again&s;t the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall proceedings in the Old Te&s;tament, wherein he that was &s;entenced had not evermore power to &s;entence his Iudge again. 4. Again&s;t the proceedings of the Church of <HI>Antioch.</HI> 5. Again&s;t that of the Independents. 6. Such a proceeding of mutuall judgement, out of feare to be judged againe, will make the Iudge|ments partiall, whereas they &s;hould be neutrall; and it is no better, then if one &s;hould &s;ay; Sir, looke you favour me this day, otherwi&s;e expect no favour from me another day. 7. We have no <HI>Con&s;i&s;tory</HI> of <HI>&s;tanding</HI> Iudges, but the &s;imple <HI>Presbytery,</HI> as you have. 8. In our way we are judged by tho&s;e, who if they doe us wrong, may be judged not by us, who are parties, but by higher and more impartiall Iudges, viz. a &s;imple Presbytery by a Cla&s;&s;e; a Cla&s;&s;e by a Provinciall Synod; and a Provinciall by a Nationall Synod. And as for that Maxime, <HI>Nunquam &s;atis fida potentia, ubi nimia,</HI> it is very true, if it be applyed to your Independent Authority in particular Congrega|tions.</P>
<P N="4">4. M. S. fourth Rea&s;on is, becau&s;e it is a great encouragement to a man that is accu&s;ed, if he be <HI>tender fore-headed,</HI> before tho&s;e, with who&s;e per&s;on he is well acquainted, and the contrary is a kind of oppre&s;&s;ion of &s;uch a man; <HI>Ergo</HI> he mu&s;t only be judged in his owne Congregation, and Independently.</P>
<P>A. S. 1. In fir&s;t in&s;tance he may be judged, as you &s;ay. 2. But if he will not &s;tand to the &s;entence of his owne particular Presbytery, and afterward be changed as you &s;ay into a &s;tone, he getteth no wrong, but what he hath pro|cured unto him&s;elfe. 3. But if his party acquie&s;ce not, but <HI>appeale,</HI> yet may he have his owne <HI>Pa&s;tor</HI> at the Cla&s;&s;e, or Provinciall Synod, to lay open his bu&s;i|ne&s;&s;e,
<PB N="123" REF="67">and it is the duty of the particular Presbytery, Se&s;&s;ion or Con&s;i&s;tory, to make good their Iudgement, &s;o as he needs not to feare. 4. And it is the cu&s;tome of our Presbyteries, Cla&s;&s;es, and Synods in &s;uch a ea&s;e, to have a care of &s;uch per&s;ons, that they receive no wrong. 5. This Rea&s;on, as the re&s;t, &s;triketh at the Kings, the Parliaments, and all Civill Magi&s;trates Authority as well, &s;ince they are not familiar with every Cobler. 6. At the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall proceedings in the Old Te&s;tament. 7. And that of Antioch. 8. I deny the con&s;equence, for the&s;e Rea&s;ons alleadged.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his 5. Rea&s;on is, becau&s;e in this Congregationall Government, pri|vate Chri&s;tians may &s;ee the judiciall proceedings in the Churth, which will be a Schoole of wi&s;dome and Experience. But it is not &s;o in remote Con&s;i&s;tories.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> What conclude you? <HI>Ergo,</HI> <GAP DESC="foreign">. 1. Such an opportunity may be found in the Presbyteriall way, in their Parochiall Iudicatories, in &s;uch matters, as require not &s;ilence. 2. Neither is it fit, that all &s;orts of Per&s;ons, as women, e&s;pecially young Damo&s;ells, and young men &s;hould heare all &s;ort of bu&s;ine&s;&s;es, that may be di&s;cu&s;&s;ed in tho&s;e Iudicatories. 3. They have more in our way, for they have our Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, and our Di&s;cipline written, or in Print, and may &s;tudy it every day at home, which is not u&s;uall among&s;t the Independents, who are never re&s;olved, neither in their Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, nor in their Government; neither will they have any one, common to all their Churches. If private Chri&s;tians de&s;ire more then this, they may goe to the Univer&s;ities. 4. This Argument &s;triketh at the Government of the State, that of the Old Te&s;tament, and at the proceedings of the Apo&s;tles, <HI>Act.</HI> 15. and 16.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his 6. Arg. in &s;ub&s;tance is, that the Premi&s;&s;es, whereupon Conclu&s;i|ons are grounded, cannot be &s;o well known, and examined in Cla&s;&s;es, and Sy|nods, as in an Independent Congregation, wherein the matter is pa&s;&s;ed, <HI>Ergo</HI> it &s;hould be judged there, and not in Cla&s;&s;es, Synods, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. This Argument, as the re&s;t, concludes, as well again&s;t the procee|dings in Civill Iudicatories, that of the Church of the Old Te&s;tament, that at <HI>Antiochia,</HI> and at <HI>Hieru&s;alens,</HI> as again&s;t the Presbyterian way. 2. Among&s;t us the bu&s;ine&s;&s;es are fir&s;t examined before the Parochiall Presbytery, or Se&s;&s;ion, where all the Premi&s;&s;es may be as well tryed, as in the Independent Congre|gation; and in ca&s;e of Appeale they may be carried to the Cla&s;&s;e, or Synod. 3. What if the difference be betwixt two divers Churches, or two per&s;ons of divers Churches, and the premi&s;&s;es be Actions, or Offences committed out of both the Churches; then in &s;uch a ca&s;e, the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e cannot be proved in any of the Churches; what if the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e need no proofe, but be &s;ome &s;canda|lous Doctrinc?</P>
<P>M. S. addeth, that for brevities &s;ake he would not &s;trengthen his Arguments as he might. <HI>A. S.</HI> And in this we prai&s;e his prudence, in publi&s;hing unto the world &s;uch frivolous Arguments, yea that have not &s;o much as any apparent probability in them.</P>
</DIV3>
</DIV2>
<DIV2 TYPE="part">
<PB N="124" REF="68">
<HEAD>Whether an Independent Government ought to be tolerated in this Kingdom?</HEAD>
<P>_TO the end we may proceed cleerly in this Que&s;tion, it is to be noted, That by this <HI>Kingdom,</HI> I mean the Kingdom of <HI>England,</HI> wherein this <HI>Government</HI> hath never yet been re|ceived. 2. It is to be noted, That a <HI>Toleration</HI> is either <HI>po&s;itiv&egrave;,</HI> whereby Po&s;itively by Law, Actuall Con&s;ent, Ap|probation, or otherwayes we receive, or give way to any thing, or <HI>negativ&egrave;;</HI> when neither by any Po&s;icive Act, Law, Actuall Con&s;ent, or Approbation, we give way to any thing, but onely actu|ally we oppo&s;e it not, make no Law again&s;t it, di&s;&s;ent not, reprove it not, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> Again, Both the one and the other, is either of particular men, or of Churches: And again, That of particular men, either &s;imply to enjoy, their Con&s;ciences in not obliging them to be Actors in any thing again&s;t the light thereof, or to give them leave freely to di&s;cour&s;e upon all occa&s;ions, with others, concerning their Tenets, yea, though it were to &s;educe them. 3. It it is again to be noted, That by <HI>Independent Government</HI> I mean that, where|by every <HI>particular Congregation</HI> is &s;o governed, that every Member thereof, <HI>hath an hand in it, and all the parts of it,</HI> and &s;o as not to acknowledge any Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power in this World above it.</P>
<P>The State of the Que&s;tion then is, <HI>Whether &s;uch Independents &s;hould have any Po&s;itive, or Negative; but principally a Po&s;itive Toleration, not onely for their Per&s;ons, but al&s;o for their Churches in this Kingdons, wherein they are not yet admitted.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> with the re&s;t of his Sect, the Browni&s;ts, Anabapti&s;ts, Antinomians, Famili&s;ts, Arminians, Serveti&s;ts, Socinians, and other Sects in this Kingdom, maintain the <HI>affirmative:</HI> But the Orthodoxes &s;tand for the <HI>negative.</HI> The Rea&s;ons for the Orthodox Part may be the&s;e that follow.</P>
<P N="1">1. Such a <HI>Toleration</HI> cannot but open a door to all &s;orts of erroneous opinions.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> denieth this <HI>A&s;&s;umption;</HI> for (&s;aith he) by the &s;ame Rea&s;on, he that receiveth one di&s;creet Servant into his Hou&s;e, mu&s;t receive all Prince <HI>Ruperts</HI> Troops, to rack and manger with him.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But <HI>M. S.</HI> under&s;tands not, or takes upon him, that he under&s;tands not my Argument; for my meaning is not, as he mi&s;con&s;trueth it, That by the
<PB N="125" REF="68">&s;ame Rea&s;on all other Sects mu&s;t be admitted, which is my fourth Rea&s;on<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="2 letters"> <HI>a pari;</HI> but that <HI>Independency</HI> being once received into the State, it will <HI>per &s;e,</HI> and <HI>natur&acirc; &s;u&acirc;,</HI> of it &s;elf open a door to all &s;orts of erroneous Opinions; which is an Argument not <HI>a pari,</HI> as the other, but <HI>a caus&acirc; ad effectum;</HI> for if the <HI>Independent Churches</HI> acknowledge no <HI>&s;uperiour Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power,</HI> and that the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> in good con&s;cience, cannot <HI>puni&s;h</HI> them; then in ca&s;e any, or many of them fall into Here&s;ie, it will open a door to Here&s;ie.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>M. S.</HI> an&s;wereth, That a <HI>Toleration</HI> of <HI>Independency</HI> will be an effectuall means of cha&s;ing away of erroneous opinions.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This is but a &s;trong imagination of <HI>M. S.</HI> which may as ea&s;ily be denied by us, upon our Rea&s;on here above alleadged, as it is boldly a&s;&s;erted by him, without any Rea&s;on at all. As for that, which he citeth out of my Book, that I acknowledge them for men of Abilities, &s;ufficient enough to di&s;pute their Opinions.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I have an&s;wered this &s;undry times, 1. It is but a judgement of one man. 2. But a judgement of Charity, which howbeit it be Practically true, yet oftentimes it proveth Speculatively fal&s;e. 3. It is not a certain, but a pro|bable judgement, whereof he doth not well to brag &s;o much. 4. Howbeit, they may not want Abilities to di&s;pute probably, yet may they want Abilities to demon&s;trate their opinions Theologically: Yea, neither all they, nor ten thou&s;and, &s;uch as <HI>M.S.</HI> with them, &s;hall ever be able to bring any &s;trong Argu|ment for any one of their Tenets, that they hold again&s;t us. 5. If they have &s;o great Abilities to di&s;pute their opinions, the Devill hath yet greater: Cannot able Lawyers di&s;pute very well a very ill Cau&s;e? Know ye not what is &s;aid of a very able man, <HI>&V;bi ben&egrave;, nemo meli&ugrave;s; ubi mal&egrave;, nemo pej&ugrave;s?</HI> Truely, ye di&s;|pute with &s;uch heat and ardency for the <HI>Independent</HI> learning, and godline&s;&s;e, that it &s;eemeth almo&s;t the onely quarrell ye have again&s;t us, whether ye be the <HI>learned&s;t,</HI> and <HI>godlie&s;t men in this Kingdom,</HI> or not? You, and they &s;eem to maintain the <HI>affirmative,</HI> at lea&s;t concerning the la&s;t part of this <HI>The&s;is,</HI> if not both; and &s;carcely &s;ee we any Book of Independency &s;et forth, wherein we &s;ee not great compla&igrave;nts, that their Abilities are not high enough prized; And what they &s;ay of their pretended piety, all the World knoweth; whereas your pretended Adver&s;aries &s;peak never a word, but of the Cau&s;e, unle&s;&s;e they be provoked by the vain and exorbitant prai&s;es, that ye ever and anon unde&s;ervedly be&s;tow upon your &s;elves. 6. But how able &s;oever you, or they be, yet for them, it is cleer, the A&s;&s;embly hath divers times put them to a non-plus. 7. And if they be &s;o <HI>able,</HI> what other rea&s;on can there be, that they plead no better their Cau&s;e, fave onely, that it is naught? It is truely a &s;trange thing, that men of &s;o great <HI>abilities,</HI> &s;hould be able to &s;ay no more for them&s;elves. 8. And &s;ince you <HI>M.S.</HI> and they are &s;o able, will you, or they, I pray, conde|&s;cend to &s;ome private meeting with &s;ome of the Presbyterians, that it may be
<PB N="126" REF="69">&s;een, who hath the be&s;t Cau&s;e, and whether or no, all your deep learning and great skill in Sophi&s;tications (wherein ye &s;o excell) can &s;et any probable &s;hew, or face of rea&s;on upon your opinions, which ye hold to be no le&s;&s;e then Gods revealed Word.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> An&s;wer, 3. <HI>Better a door opened to all &s;orts of erroneous opinions,</HI> yea, and to many other inconveniencies greater then this, then that the guilt of any per&s;ecution, or of any evill entreatings of the Saints and people of God, &s;hould cleave unto the people or State.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> this <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;uppo&s;eth, 1. That the <HI>Independents</HI> are the <HI>Saints.</HI> 2. And that in ca&s;e they be not <HI>tolerated,</HI> in e&s;tabli&s;hing publikely their <HI>Church Government,</HI> and other <HI>Tenets,</HI> in de&s;pight of <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>Parliament,</HI> both in the <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>State,</HI> that it is no le&s;&s;e then the <HI>guilt of per&s;ecution</HI> again&s;t the <HI>Saints</HI> drawn upon the <HI>State.</HI> 3. That it were better, that all the <HI>Here&s;ies</HI> of the World, and wor&s;e &s;hould creep into the <HI>Church,</HI> then that they &s;hould not be <HI>tolerated,</HI> but <HI>cha&s;ti&s;ed,</HI> in ca&s;e they trouble the peace of either <HI>Church</HI> or <HI>state:</HI> I an&s;wer, That all that <HI>M. S.</HI> here &s;ayeth are damnable untruths, and that it were better, that all the <HI>Independents</HI> of this World were in <HI>Ame|rica,</HI> and that ten thou&s;and times wor&s;e &s;hould befall them, then that the good Name of God &s;hould be di&s;honoured by filthy <HI>Here&s;ies:</HI> And if the <HI>Inde|pendents</HI> had any fear of God before their eyes, and loved not them&s;elves better a great deal then Gods glory, they would rather de&s;ire with <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> to be &s;crap't out of the Book of life, or with <HI>Paul</HI> to be &s;eparated from <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> then that <HI>Chri&s;ts Church</HI> &s;hould &s;o &s;uffer, or Gods ble&s;&s;ed Name be &s;o di&s;ho|noured.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 2. Rea&s;on. It is dangerous for the <HI>State;</HI> it may breed Factions and Divi&s;ions betwixt all Per&s;ons of what&s;oever relation, betwixt the <HI>Magi&s;trate</HI> and the <HI>Subject,</HI> the <HI>Husband</HI> and the <HI>Wife,</HI> the <HI>Father</HI> and the <HI>Son, Brethren,</HI> and <HI>Si&s;ters,</HI> the <HI>Ma&s;ter</HI> and the <HI>Servant,</HI> when the one is of one <HI>Religion,</HI> or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government,</HI> and the other of another, as ye, yea, to your no very great advantage, have experimented it &s;everall times. The <HI>Son</HI> may refu&s;e to receive any Communion with the <HI>Father,</HI> and the <HI>Brother</HI> with the <HI>Brother,</HI> to the utter di&s;&s;olution of all naturall, civill, and dome&s;ticall bonds of Socie|tie: And the rea&s;on of this may be, becau&s;e the one may Excommunicate the other, as daily Experience te&s;tifies.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> The &s;hadows of the Mountains &s;eem Men unto you, <HI>Judg.</HI> 9.36.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> So &s;aid <HI>Zebul,</HI> the &s;ervant of <HI>Abimelech,</HI> the &s;on of the Concubine, who by a con&s;piracy with the <HI>Schichemites,</HI> was made King, and afterwards murthered his Brethren; and yet they were men. <HI>viz.</HI> Wicked <HI>Abimelech</HI> with his Army, and no &s;hadows of Mountains. <HI>M. S.</HI> would have us live in &s;ecu|rity, and would rather <HI>tolerate</HI> Sociniani&s;m, Arminiani&s;m, yea, Iudai&s;m, and Mahumetani&s;m, then that his own Sect &s;hould not be <HI>tolerated;</HI> Of &s;o large a con&s;cience is he.</P>
<PB N="127" REF="69">
<P>A.S. It may breed Factions, &amp;c.</P>
<P>M.S. But A. S. his <HI>may</HI> may po&s;&s;ibly not come in an Age, no nor in many Generations; and would he have &s;o many Thou&s;ands of the deare People of God, as do Apologize, to eat their bread in darkne&s;&s;e? And he &s;aid heretofore, that <HI>May</HI> commeth but once a yeere.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> It is &s;ubtilly argued, <HI>M.S.</HI> of you with your <HI>May,</HI> but it is too much that &s;uch a <HI>May</HI> come once a yeere, or once in an Age; and better were it, ten thou&s;and of you &s;hould peri&s;h, then God be &s;o offended; for it is a Ma|xime in Divinity, <HI>Quodvis malum Paenae, etiam maximum, eligendum potius qu&agrave;m minimum malum Culpae; nam quaevis Culpa pejor quavis Poen&acirc;.</HI> 2. But I pray you learne of me, that as <HI>impo&s;&s;ibile morale</HI> in morall matters, &s;uch as this whereof we di&s;pute, is not that which <HI>never,</HI> but which <HI>rarely</HI> or hardly falleth out: &s;o is <HI>po&s;&s;ibile morale, idem quod facil&egrave;,</HI> which <HI>ea&s;ily</HI> and <HI>oftentimes</HI> falleth out, and not that falleth out but <HI>once in an Age:</HI> And that it falleth out &s;o very oft, we may prove it by the Divi&s;ions in <HI>France,</HI> the <HI>Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Tran&s;ilvania,</HI> &amp;c. What, I pray, tran&s;ported the Crown of <HI>Swede</HI> from the <HI>Nephew</HI> to the <HI>&V;nkle?</HI> What moved a King of <HI>Spaine</HI> to con&s;ent to his own Sons death? What is the cau&s;e of &s;o great a War betwixt the <HI>Turk</HI> and the <HI>Per&s;ian?</HI> And finally, what is the cau&s;e of this our pre&s;ent War, but the favouring of <HI>Popery,</HI> the Negotiations with <HI>Rome,</HI> our Agents there, Father <HI>Con,</HI> and the <HI>Popes Nuncio</HI> here?</P>
<P N="2">2. Ye are not &s;o many Thou&s;ands, as ye brag of, &s;ave in <HI>London,</HI> and a few miles about it; your Sect, I think, may ea&s;ily be counted by Hundreds; and as for the remoter parts of the Kingdome, they are unknowne Creatures to them.</P>
<P N="3">3. If they be &s;o <HI>deare to God,</HI> they can never, <HI>qua tales,</HI> &s;uffer for &s;o wicked a cau&s;e, as for <HI>all Licentiou&s;ne&s;&s;e</HI> in Religion.</P>
<P N="4">4. They need not to <HI>&s;uffer,</HI> if they will not be turbulent, but quiet, and &s;ubmit unto the Lawes of the Kingdome, and &s;uch an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Govern|ment, as in Gods mercy &s;hall be e&s;tabli&s;hed in the <HI>Church.</HI> What a &s;awcine&s;&s;e is this, that they will be content with nothing, unle&s;&s;e, in de&s;pight of <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>State,</HI> they may doe what they will?</P>
<P N="5">5. As for his Rhetorications, in telling me that I am <HI>bred of Rocks, and &s;uck'd the milk of Tygers;</HI> All that &s;hall not hinder me to maintaine, that the <HI>Independents</HI> mu&s;t be &s;ubject to Order and Authority, both <HI>Civill</HI> and <HI>Eccle|&s;ia&s;ticall,</HI> as other men are, or el&s;e <HI>&s;uffer</HI> for their turbulent humour.</P>
<P>M. S. I would know of him, whether he deemeth him&s;elfe to be of another <HI>Religion</HI> then the <HI>Apologi&s;ts?</HI> If &s;o, <HI>Candorem tuum,</HI> A.S. in that malignant expre&s;&s;ion, &amp;c.</P>
<P>A.S. As for my Religion, you may know it, M.S. It is that which is decla|red in the <HI>Confe&s;&s;ions</HI> of the <HI>Churches</HI> of <HI>Scotland, England,</HI> the <HI>Netherlands, France, &amp;c.</HI> But as for yours,
<PB N="128" REF="70">
<Q><L>Sed vos, qui tandem? quibus aut veni&s;tis ab eris?</L>
<L>Quov&egrave; tenetis iter?</L></Q> that I know not, and con&s;equently, whether I be of your Religion or not: Ye will have no <HI>Confe&s;&s;ion</HI> of <HI>Faith</HI> or <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> but what you may change, <HI>Fidem diariam, aut ad &s;ummum men&s;truam,</HI> &s;uch as you may change with every Moon.</P>
<P>But to come more neere to the Point: I pray you, &s;et forth a <HI>Confe&s;&s;ion</HI> of <HI>Faith</HI> in the name of all the <HI>Independent Churches,</HI> and &s;ub&s;cribe all of you, that ye will &s;tand to it, and then I will an&s;wer your Que&s;tion: If ye will not, here I will give you the be&s;t &s;atisfaction I can, and it is this, <HI>viz.</HI> That not long &s;ince, I heard one of the Ringleaders of the Independent Sect deliver this Doctrine in a Sermon at the Abby of <HI>We&s;tmin&s;ter,</HI> viz. That <HI>to a &s;aving knowledge of God, it &s;ufficeth not to know him in the Book of Nature, or</HI> 2. <HI>as revealed in the holy Scriptures;</HI> but that <HI>we mu&s;t al&s;o know him as ab&s;tract from his Mercy,</HI> and <HI>all his Attributes.</HI> Now if this be a common Tenet of your Religion, I mu&s;t confe&s;&s;e, I am none of yours; My Rea&s;ons are, 1. Becau&s;e that if it be &s;o, rude people, that know nothing of &s;o <HI>refined Ab&s;tractions,</HI> mu&s;t be damned. 2. Becau&s;e, to <HI>be &s;aved,</HI> it is mo&s;t nece&s;&s;ary to know God as <HI>con|crete with his Mercy,</HI> or as <HI>mercifull towards us in Chri&s;t.</HI> 3. If I <HI>know God</HI> evermore under this <HI>refined ab&s;traction from Mercy,</HI> I mu&s;t be <HI>damned.</HI> 4. Be|cau&s;e, if I know God <HI>ab&s;tracted from his Mercy,</HI> I know him <HI>out of Chri&s;t,</HI> and <HI>out of the Go&s;pel;</HI> for God in Chri&s;t, and in the Go&s;pel, is not <HI>ab&s;tract,</HI> but <HI>con|crete</HI> with <HI>Mercy.</HI> 5. Becau&s;e the <HI>knowledge of God, as revealed in Scripture, is &s;ufficient to &s;alvation, Ergo,</HI> it is not needfull to know him any otherwayes in this life. 6. Becau&s;e, if I know God <HI>out of Scripture, and ab&s;tract from Mercy,</HI> it is a <HI>Knowledge without Faith;</HI> for Faiths <HI>formall Object</HI> is <HI>God in Chri&s;t, as revealed in Scripture;</HI> and therefore it is a knowledge of <HI>God in Chri&s;t, as revealed in Scripture;</HI> and therefore there mu&s;t be &s;ome <HI>&s;aving knowledge of God without Faith.</HI> 7. If a <HI>&s;aving knowledge of God</HI> be of God as <HI>ab&s;tract from all his Attributes,</HI> it mu&s;t be a knowledge of God without any <HI>Simplicity,</HI> and &s;o of God as <HI>ab&s;tract from a pure Act.</HI> 8. As <HI>ab&s;tract from all his Perfections, i.e.</HI> without all his <HI>Perfections.</HI> 9. <HI>E.</HI> of God, as <HI>ab&s;tract</HI> from his <HI>Good|nes,</HI> and &s;o as without his <HI>Goodnes.</HI> 10. Of God as without <HI>In&s;initie.</HI> 11. Without <HI>Omnipre&s;ence.</HI> 12. Without <HI>Immutability:</HI> 13. Without <HI>Eternity.</HI> 14. Without <HI>Life,</HI> without <HI>Knowledge, Science</HI> or <HI>Wi&s;dome.</HI> 15. Without any <HI>Will.</HI> 16. Without any <HI>Love</HI> towards Mankind. 17. Without <HI>Hatred</HI> of <HI>Sin</HI> or <HI>Sinners.</HI> 18. Without <HI>Power</HI> or <HI>Omnipotencie.</HI> 19. Without any <HI>Decree</HI> of <HI>Prede&s;tinati|on</HI> or <HI>Reprobation.</HI> 20. Without any <HI>Providence</HI> or care of his Creatures. 21. Without <HI>Creation,</HI> and &s;o not as <HI>Creator:</HI> For to know God as ab&s;tract from the&s;e <HI>Attributes,</HI> is to know God as without them: Now who dare &s;ay, that to know God, as <HI>ab&s;tract</HI> from all tho&s;e <HI>Attributes,</HI> or <HI>without them,</HI> is a <HI>&s;aving knowledge:</HI> This is indeed an <HI>Independent &s;aving knowledge,</HI> indepen|dent
<PB N="129" REF="70">on Gods Word, on Chri&s;t, on Faith, and all Grace; and con&s;equently <HI>mo&s;t gracele&s;&s;e:</HI> 23. To know <HI>God,</HI> as <HI>ab&s;tract</HI> from all his Attributes, is to know God, as <HI>ab&s;tract</HI> from his <HI>E&s;&s;ence,</HI> and &s;o to know God, as <HI>without him&s;elf,</HI> or his own <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> or <HI>Being;</HI> for <HI>Gods Attributes</HI> are not only <HI>eadem cum E&s;&s;entid ut per&s;onae, &s;ed &amp; de E&s;&s;entia, de quidditativo ejus conceptu, &amp; praedicatae ejus e&s;&s;entialiae,</HI> and &s;ome of them, <HI>qua&s;i de &s;pecifico ejus conceptu;</HI> from which God can no wayes be <HI>ab&s;tracted.</HI> 24. If God be con&s;idered, as <HI>ab&s;tract</HI> from all his <HI>Attributes;</HI> it is no more a knowledge of God, but &s;ome Idol of the <HI>Independents</HI> brains; <HI>&s;icque habes meum candorem &amp; ve&s;trum pariteratro|rem:</HI> Now let the Reader judge, which of our two expre&s;&s;ions is mo&s;t Malignant.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his third An&s;wer comes to this; Grant them their de&s;ires, <HI>i. e.</HI> A full liberty, and they will bray no more then the wilde A&s;&s;e doth, when he hath Gra&s;&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. All Hereticks &s;ay as much, yea, the Devill would be glad to agree with God upon &s;uch terms. 2. But God hath forbid the Church to <HI>tolerate</HI> you; 3. In <HI>New England,</HI> they of your Party will <HI>tolerate</HI> no Sects; 4. And &s;uch a <HI>Toleration</HI> here cannot but breed all &s;orts of Divi&s;ions; Whereas, if there be one onely Di&s;cipline or Church Government e&s;tabli&s;hed, we &s;hall have no Di&s;tractions at all. 5. But how can (I pray unriddle it me) a Liber|ty granted to conte&s;t and quarrell one with another, ever take away con|te&s;tations and quarrells? 6. If the Presbyterians be the cau&s;e of Divi&s;ions, becau&s;e they <HI>tolerate</HI> not you (as you &s;ay;) &s;o was <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> and <HI>Aaron,</HI> for not <HI>tolerating, Core, Dathan,</HI> and <HI>Abiron.</HI> Your <HI>Simile</HI> of him, who murthered the Duke of <HI>Burgundie,</HI> will hold, if it be applyed to your Sect; otherwayes, it is altogether impertinent, and be&s;ide the pre&s;ent purpo&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his fourth An&s;wer cometh to this, That in ca&s;e one Government were e&s;tabli&s;hed, it would breed as great, or more Factions and Divi&s;ions, then if a <HI>Toleration</HI> were granted.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This Argument concludeth, as well again&s;t <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> in favour of <HI>Core, Dathan,</HI> and <HI>Abiron,</HI> as again&s;t us; for if <HI>Mo&s;es</HI> had granted &s;uch a <HI>To|leration</HI> to them, and their Sect, as the <HI>Independents</HI> are now Suitors for, it would not have bred &s;uch Divi&s;ions; And if the <HI>non-Toleration</HI> of it breed as great Divi&s;ions, as the <HI>Toleration</HI> of it would have done, what is the cau&s;e that this <HI>Toleration</HI> of your Sect breedeth &s;o many injurious and calumnious Expre&s;&s;ions again&s;t the Presbyterians? What would ye not &s;ay and do, had ye once gotten a <HI>Toleration?</HI></P>
<P>To <HI>M. S.</HI> his fifth An&s;wer, That <HI>&s;undry per&s;ons of one Family,</HI> in the City, hear <HI>divers Mini&s;ters,</HI> without any Divi&s;ion?</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> I an&s;wer, That tho&s;e Mini&s;ters are not of <HI>divers Sects,</HI> or if they be, with|out doubt, it breedeth many Divi&s;ions, and alienates their mindes one from another: Neither can any Godly good man, who is bound by duty to have a
<PB N="130" REF="71">care of his Family, but be grieved, when he &s;eeth his Children, his Wife, and Servants &s;eparated in affection from him, and the Church, wherein he &s;erveth God, and to eat at his Table in his Hou&s;e, when they will not eat at the Lords Table with him, in the Hou&s;e of God.</P>
<P>What ye &s;ay of a <HI>Hou&s;e of bondage;</HI> if we were all under one Government, it is mo&s;t fal&s;e; For by the &s;ame Rea&s;on, the People of God &s;hould have been in an <HI>Hou&s;e of bondage,</HI> when they came out of <HI>Egypt,</HI> and were brought into the Land of <HI>Canaan,</HI> becau&s;e that there they had <HI>but one Government.</HI> So with you it mu&s;t be an <HI>Hou&s;e of bondage,</HI> in every State, that hath but <HI>one &s;ort of Civil Government.</HI></P>
<P>I will not an&s;wer his vain vaunting, in extolling his own Sect: Onely I wonder, that he is offended at us, that we de&s;ire but one good Government, what ever it be; Is it ill to have but one good Government? Wherefore does he plead for many ill Governments? Wherefore will not tho&s;e of <HI>New England</HI> admit many, if it be &s;o good? If it be want of Mercy not to <HI>tole|rate</HI> others, how mercile&s;&s;e were the Mercies of <HI>New England,</HI> that would not <HI>tolerate</HI> Presbyterians, no not in a corner of their Countrey, when their Necks were put in the Pillories, their No&s;es &s;litted, their Ears cut, and their per&s;ons impri&s;oned?</P>
<P>What <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;ayeth of <HI>di&s;tractions of mindes,</HI> under Epi&s;copall Govern|ment; it was not for want of a <HI>Toleration</HI> of <HI>all Sects, and all &s;ort of Eccle&s;ia|&s;ticall Governments:</HI> Neither have I ever heard of any Petition made about it, much le&s;&s;e for any Independent Government.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> And where Con&s;cience is tender, a little violence is a great torment to it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> It hath been told you, twenty times; 1. That no man <HI>violateth</HI> or <HI>forceth</HI> your <HI>Con&s;ciences;</HI> 2. And all Sects bring the &s;ame pretext of <HI>tender Con&s;ciences.</HI> 3. And we tell you again, That your wayes are not wayes of <HI>tender,</HI> but of <HI>turbulent Con&s;ciences.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 3. Argument. No State in Chri&s;tendom, where there is one onely Religion e&s;tabli&s;hed, will admit the publike exerci&s;e of any other, or endure a Schi&s;m in that, which is already received: Wherefore then &s;hould it be done here?</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his third Rea&s;on, 1. Suppo&s;eth that malignant Suppo&s;ition, <HI>viz.</HI> That Presbytery and Apologi&s;m, make two differing Religions. 2. That there is no State in Chri&s;tendom, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> 3. That <HI>Apologi&s;m,</HI> in ca&s;e it be <HI>tolerated,</HI> mu&s;t needs become a <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> in that Religion, which is e&s;tabli&s;hed in the Land.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> To the fir&s;t I an&s;wer, 1. That neither I do &s;uppo&s;e, nor yet can &s;up|po&s;e any &s;uch thing; For we &s;ee no common Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith of the <HI>A|pologi&s;m;</HI> neither will the <HI>Apologi&s;ts</HI> be known or declare their Tenets; but are evermore in the Synod, and out of the Synod, ob&s;erving what is there
<PB N="131" REF="71">&s;aid or done, taking their advantage upon all occa&s;ions, and &s;haping their Tenets, according to the current of the times.</P>
<P N="2">2. If the word, <HI>Religion,</HI> be taken in a large &s;ignification, as it containeth in it &s;elf both <HI>doctrine</HI> and <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> then the Independents are of a different <HI>Religion</HI> from us, &s;ince their <HI>Di&s;cipline</HI> is altogether different.</P>
<P N="3">3. If it be taken for a <HI>potentiall part of Ju&s;tice,</HI> which inclineth the will to honour God; then the Independents differ from us in <HI>very many acts of Reli|gion,</HI> both in tho&s;e that it <HI>exerci&s;eth,</HI> whether they be <HI>internall</HI> or <HI>externall,</HI> and in tho&s;e, that it <HI>commands</HI> to other vertues; and con&s;equently in Religion it &s;elf; For they have much &s;uper&s;tition in the Acts of their Religion; 1. In re&s;pect of the per&s;ons, in that they make every man a Mini&s;ter, to Preach, and to Rule. 2. In their Sacraments, in that they take their &s;elves to be &s;o holy, that no Prote&s;tant, yea, though he &s;o live, as that he give no offence to any man, is yet worthy of their Communion, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>If it be taken for the <HI>Doctrine</HI> of <HI>Faith;</HI> We know not the <HI>Doctrine</HI> of their <HI>Churches,</HI> &s;ince they are all Independent one upon another; but as for that of particular Independent Per&s;ons, Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwins</HI> Religion of <HI>Coal|man&s;treet</HI> (who is thought to be an Independent, and matriculated into the In|dependent Society) is a Religion different from ours, as appeareth by his Books, which are blamed by the be&s;t Mini&s;ters of <HI>London,</HI> whereof &s;ome of them have written again&s;t him: So is that of that other mo&s;t famous Indepen|dent, who preached not long ago at <HI>We&s;tmin&s;ter,</HI> of &s;ome of who&s;e Doctrines, I gave you a &s;hort relation, but even now.</P>
<P>As for the &s;econd Suppo&s;ition, <HI>M. S.</HI> he &s;aith, that it is manife&s;tly untrue, as it is notoriou&s;ly known in <HI>France,</HI> the <HI>Low-Countries, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But it is notoriou&s;ly known in <HI>France,</HI> that it is again&s;t the will of the <HI>State,</HI> and of all <HI>Papi&s;ts,</HI> that <HI>Prote&s;tants</HI> are <HI>tolerated</HI> there, as it appeareth evidently;
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. By &s;o many bloody Ma&s;&s;acres, and Butcheries of the Prote&s;tants there.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. By &s;o many Wars, whereby they obtained a Liberty of Con&s;cience.</ITEM>
<ITEM>3. They had many Princes of the Royall Blood for them, who were Pro|te&s;tants; many Officers of the Crown; many of the Parliament in <HI>Paris;</HI> and finally, King <HI>Henry</HI> the fourth, who in the beginning was a Prote&s;tant, to whom by Succe&s;&s;ion belonged the Crown; for who&s;e right they &s;ought very &s;toutly in &s;undry Battels, furni&s;hed him with men and moneys for the War; And he after his externall revoult, remaining evermore a Prote&s;tant in his heart, as it is commonly beleeved; and fearing the Je&s;uiticall Faction, in re|compence of their good &s;ervice, granted them Liberty of their Con&s;ciences, Free Exerci&s;e of their Religion, and Towns of &s;urety and &s;ecurity: therefore they obtained then their Liberties by the Sword; And afterward, they were confirmed by Law, but &s;ore again&s;t the State, and the Papi&s;ts will: And all this notwith&s;tanding, the Papi&s;ticall Sect evermore undermines them, and by
<PB N="132" REF="72">little and little, again&s;t all Law, cuts them &s;hort of tho&s;e Liberties, &s;o deerly purcha&s;ed by them.</ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<P>But if you take <HI>France,</HI> for &s;uch a Refuge for Libertini&s;m, you would do well to try, whether ye can &s;ettle a Colony of yours there; I beleeve you would quickly experiment it, how little favour ye &s;hould receive there, in re&s;pect of that you have already received of your own Countrey-men.</P>
<P>As for the <HI>Netherlands,</HI> if there were but one <HI>Religion</HI> there, they would not <HI>tolerate</HI> any other; And what they have done in <HI>tolerating many,</HI> it is not &s;o much <HI>will,</HI> as <HI>nece&s;&s;ity,</HI> that hath forced them to do &s;o: And the <HI>Hi&s;tory</HI> te|&s;tifies how unwilling they were in the beginning, to grant any <HI>Toleration</HI> at all to the Papi&s;ts, where they were already e&s;tabli&s;hed. If yours of late have been <HI>tolerated</HI> there; 1. It was, becau&s;e ye taught not there in their Lan|guage, but in <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> to <HI>Engli&s;h</HI> men. 2. And there ye profe&s;&s;ed not (for any thing we know) that Presbyteriall Government was Epi&s;copall, or contrary to Gods Word, as ye do here. 3. They beleeved, that if ye could have got|ten the Exerci&s;e of Presbyteriall Government in <HI>England,</HI> ye would not have been &s;o aver&s;e from it, as ye are. 4. We know not whether your <HI>Religion</HI> was <HI>tolerated</HI> by the <HI>States Generall;</HI> or whether it was <HI>tolerated Po&s;itive</HI> or <HI>Negativ&egrave;.</HI></P>
<P>The third Suppo&s;ition is true. But <HI>M. S.</HI> replieth, or rather an&s;wereth, That every difference in judgement doth not make a Schi&s;m in that <HI>Religion,</HI> which is profe&s;&s;ed on both &s;ides.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Neither &s;aid I any &s;uch thing. But <HI>M. S.</HI> here giveth him&s;elf much to do, with many long and idle di&s;cour&s;es, without any rea&s;on at all. If he de&s;ire to know what Independency is, whether an Here&s;ie, or a Schi&s;m? I have evermore dealt fairly with him, I have given a <HI>Definition</HI> of both. <HI>Here&s;ie is an errour in part, in matters of Faith, in him, who once profe&s;&s;ed it, whereof he being &s;ufficiently convicted, yet he continueth, and pertinaciou&s;ly per|&s;everes in it:</HI> But <HI>Schi&s;m is a breach of Chri&s;tian Charitie onely, whereby men &s;eparate them&s;elves from the Communion of the true Church; and after &s;ufficient Conviction, pertinaciou&s;ly per&s;evere in the &s;ame.</HI></P>
<P>Here I take <HI>Here&s;ie</HI> and <HI>Schi&s;m</HI> in a <HI>&s;trict</HI> &s;ignification, as they are taken by <HI>Divines,</HI> both Prote&s;tants and Schoolmen, when they di&s;tingui&s;h them, one from another. If he admit the&s;e <HI>Definitions,</HI> which are ordinarily approved of in the Schools; we may examine thereby the Independency, and &s;ee whe|ther it be a <HI>Schi&s;m</HI> or an <HI>Here&s;ie,</HI> or not: If he reject it, I would pray him, to give us &s;ome better one: I &s;ay not that Independency is a <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> or that the Independent Churches are <HI>Schi&s;maticall,</HI> for &s;ome diver&s;ity of Opinion; for that belongeth rather to <HI>Here&s;ie,</HI> then to <HI>Schi&s;m:</HI> Nor 2. that it is a <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> becau&s;e that it is <HI>tolerated,</HI> or <HI>not tolerated;</HI> for <HI>Toleration</HI> is a Con&s;equent of <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> and Extrin&s;ecall to it; The true Rea&s;on wherefore it is a <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> and they <HI>Schi&s;maticall,</HI> is becau&s;e it is a breach of <HI>Charity,</HI> in that they &s;eparate
<PB N="133" REF="72">them&s;elves from the Communion of the true <HI>Church,</HI> yea and from all the true <HI>Churches</HI> in the World, both in Sacramentall Communion, and that of Di&s;cipline: Neither is it a <HI>Schi&s;me,</HI> becau&s;e that it is a &s;eparation from <HI>Presbyteriall Churches</HI> preci&s;ely, under the notion of <HI>Presbyteriall,</HI> but of true and Orthodox <HI>Churches,</HI> which pre&s;&s;e them no wayes to be Actors in any thing again&s;t their Con&s;ciences.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> in de&s;pite of all rea&s;on will prove, that I cannot convict the <HI>Inde|pendents</HI> of <HI>Schi&s;me,</HI> and that by this his mo&s;t &s;eriall Argument, which here I put in forme, with all the force it can have;</P>
<P>He that knoweth not, what is <HI>Schi&s;m,</HI> cannot convict the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>Schi&s;m.</HI></P>
<P>But, <HI>A. S.</HI> knoweth not what is <HI>Schi&s;me. Ergo,</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> cannot convict the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>Schi&s;me.</HI></P>
<P>The Major is certain; The Minor, he proveth thus; He that knoweth not what is the <HI>Church,</HI> knoweth not what is <HI>Schi&s;me,</HI> or a <HI>rent</HI> of the <HI>Church;</HI> For <HI>Rectum e&s;t Index &s;ui et obliqui:</HI> and <HI>entia privativa Cogno&s;cuntur ex &s;uis po&s;itivis &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>But <HI>A. S.</HI> knoweth not what is the <HI>Church;</HI> for he &s;ayeth, we know not wherein con&s;i&s;ts its <HI>E&s;&s;ence,</HI> p. 21. <HI>Ergo:</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer to the fir&s;t Argument, that the Minor is fal&s;e, as appear|eth by the Difinition that I have given of it, both in my <HI>Annotations</HI> upon the Apologeticall Narration; in my An&s;wer unto a Libell of <HI>C. C.</HI> and he re|tofore, &s;omewhere in this Booke, again&s;t the which <HI>M. S.</HI> had nothing to reply.</P>
<P>To the confirmation of the Minor, I an&s;wer, that if by the word, <HI>knoweth, M. S.</HI> meaneth a <HI>di&s;tinct knowledge</HI> of the <HI>E&s;&s;entiall parts</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> the Major is fal&s;e; for <HI>Schi&s;me</HI> is not a <HI>renting</HI> of the <HI>E&s;&s;entiall parts</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> or of its <HI>tran&s;cendentall</HI> or <HI>Metaphy&s;icall &V;nity,</HI> but of its <HI>integrant parts,</HI> and <HI>integrant &V;nity;</HI> for the fir&s;t cannot be de&s;troyed, &s;o long as it is a true <HI>Church:</HI> And <HI>Schi&s;maticall Churches</HI> may have their <HI>tran&s;cendent u|nity, verity,</HI> and <HI>goodne&s;&s;e,</HI> how&s;oever they loo&s;e their <HI>integrant unity, verity,</HI> and <HI>goodne&s;&s;e:</HI> If by the word, <HI>knoweth,</HI> he meane any <HI>knowledge</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> either <HI>confu&s;ed</HI> or <HI>di&s;tinct,</HI> whereby we may <HI>know</HI> the <HI>Church,</HI> by her <HI>externall Cau&s;es,</HI> her <HI>integrant parts,</HI> her <HI>Accidents, &amp;c.</HI> The Minor is fal&s;e, for not onely <HI>A. S.</HI> but little Children at Schoole have &s;uch a <HI>knowledge</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> which they learn in their <HI>Catechi&s;mes,</HI> And by any &s;uch <HI>confu&s;e</HI> or <HI>di&s;tinct knowledge</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> by her <HI>Cau&s;es, Accidents,</HI> or <HI>Effects, &amp;c.</HI> we may <HI>confu&s;edly,</HI> or <HI>di&s;tinctly know,</HI> what is <HI>Schi&s;me,</HI> howbeit not <HI>E&s;&s;en|tially.</HI></P>
<P>As for the Confirmation of the Minor; By my words, I &s;ayd not there, that I knew not what the <HI>Church</HI> is <HI>confu&s;edly,</HI> or <HI>di&s;tinctly</HI> by her <HI>Cau&s;es, inte|grant parts,</HI> her <HI>Accidents, &amp;c.</HI> But that we know not <HI>di&s;tinctly</HI> the <HI>E&s;&s;ences</HI> of things, as <HI>di&s;tingui&s;hed</HI> from their <HI>Accidents,</HI> as the Reader may &s;ee, if he
<PB N="134" REF="73">looke in my Booke; for there, in that page 21. I &s;peake in <HI>formall</HI> termes of that, which is <HI>E&s;&s;entiall</HI> to the <HI>Church:</HI> Now if <HI>M. S.</HI> pretend to any &s;uch profound knowledge of things, we mu&s;t confe&s;&s;e him to be an other <HI>Epi&s;te|mon.</HI> Doctor <HI>du Molin, Profe&s;&s;or</HI> in Divinity at <HI>Sedan,</HI> holds the &s;ame Te|net, in his <HI>The&s;is de Summo Bono:</HI> So did the other <HI>Profe&s;&s;ors</HI> of Divinity there; for they &s;ay, that no Creature, neither in this life, nor in the life to come, yea, not the very Angels know the <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> of any thing; And from thence they conclude, that we &s;hall not &s;ee the <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> of God in the life to come: The which A&s;&s;ertion, how&s;oever I confe&s;&s;e it to be true, <HI>de hominibus viatoribus:</HI> yet can I not beleeve it to be true, <HI>de Angelis viatoribus;</HI> and much le&s;&s;e <HI>de Angelis, aut hominibus comprehen&s;oribus: M. S.</HI> &s;hould have done better, to have An&s;wered my Rea&s;ons that I bring there pag. 21. then &s;o a|gain&s;t the light of his Con&s;cience, to &s;cratch at a known truth: Neither can I beleeve him to be &s;o ignorant, as not to know, and acknowledge the truth of it in him&s;elfe, however out of de&s;ire of Conte&s;tation he manife&s;ts the contrary.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> to the end he &s;eeme not altogether impertinent, proveth it by an Argument taken <HI>ab Exemplo;</HI> or by an imperfect <HI>Induction;</HI> if it be not a <HI>Pari;</HI> or from them altogether.</P>
<P>I cannot beleeve (&s;aith he) that he &s;hould perfectly <HI>know</HI> the <HI>nature</HI> of <HI>dark|ne&s;&s;e,</HI> that is <HI>ignorant</HI> of what belongeth to the <HI>nature</HI> of <HI>light;</HI> Nor that he &s;hould know what a <HI>Schi&s;me</HI> or <HI>Rent</HI> meanes, that knowes not what belongs to the nature of <HI>&V;nity</HI> and <HI>Entirene&s;&s;e</HI> of the Body; for <HI>Rectum e&s;t index &s;ui, &amp; obliqui,</HI> and <HI>Entia privativa cogno&s;cuntur ex &s;uis po&s;itivis.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> We know not perfectly the <HI>nature</HI> of <HI>Light,</HI> and con&s;equently we know not perfectly the <HI>nature</HI> of <HI>Darkne&s;&s;e;</HI> if to <HI>know perfectly,</HI> be taken for a <HI>di&s;tinct knowledge</HI> of its <HI>E&s;&s;ence,</HI> as di&s;tingni&s;hed from its <HI>Accidents:</HI> onely we know <HI>light</HI> imperfectly, by its <HI>externall cau&s;es,</HI> by its <HI>effects,</HI> by its <HI>&s;ubject, adjuncts,</HI> &amp;c. and not <HI>e&s;&s;entially.</HI> And as for your fir&s;t Maxime, <HI>Rectum e&s;t index &s;ui, &amp; obliqui;</HI> it is true; <HI>&s;ed non per di&s;tinctum aliquem conceptum &s;ui e&s;&s;entialem,</HI> as Philo&s;ophers &s;ay. Your &s;econd Maxime, whom&s;oever you imi|tate in that Expre&s;&s;ion, is improper; for <HI>Privations</HI> are not properly <HI>Entia privativa,</HI> but <HI>Entium privationes,</HI> not <HI>E&s;&s;ences</HI> or <HI>Beings,</HI> but <HI>negations</HI> of <HI>Being;</HI> neither is <HI>Darkne&s;&s;e</HI> any thing but a <HI>negation</HI> of &s;omething, viz. of <HI>Light:</HI> &s;o <HI>Poverty</HI> is not a <HI>thing,</HI> but a want of &s;ome <HI>thing,</HI> viz. of <HI>Riches.</HI> 2. But I will pardon him this mi&s;take: howbeit it were true, yet followeth it not, that if I know a <HI>Privation</HI> by the <HI>Po&s;itive Forme</HI> which it de&s;troyeth, that I know that <HI>Forme e&s;&s;entially,</HI> by its E&s;&s;ence, and in it &s;elfe: I know the Forme only <HI>accidentally,</HI> or by its <HI>extrin&s;ecall cau&s;es,</HI> or by its <HI>Exi&s;tence.</HI> 3. <HI>Item,</HI> So we conceive <HI>Privations,</HI> under the notion of <HI>Negations,</HI> or <HI>de&s;tructions</HI> of the <HI>Exi&s;tences,</HI> rather then of the <HI>E&s;&s;ences</HI> of things; or at mo&s;t, as <HI>de&s;tructions</HI> of the Exi&s;tence <HI>primario;</HI> and of the E&s;&s;ence <HI>&s;ecundari&ograve;,</HI> if they be de&s;troyed
<PB N="135" REF="73">by <HI>Privations:</HI> Neither can I beleeve, that the <HI>Fire</HI> burneth and de&s;troyeth immediately the <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> of a Man, or any part thereof; for the <HI>Rea&s;onable &s;oule</HI> is <HI>&s;pirituall,</HI> and cannot be <HI>burnt;</HI> &s;o is the other part of his <HI>E&s;&s;ence,</HI> viz. his <HI>materia prima,</HI> incombu&s;tible, yea naturally incorruptible: and as for the <HI>Phy&s;icall e&s;&s;ence</HI> of the whole man, when <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;hall declare wherein it con|&s;i&s;ts, I &s;hall di&s;pute with him: But, &s;illy man, with this babling Logick, knows he not that <HI>Accidents</HI> are never defined by their <HI>E&s;&s;entiall differences,</HI> but e|vermore by their <HI>Externall Cau&s;es,</HI> or by their <HI>Accidents;</HI> and &s;ometimes by their <HI>Oppo&s;ites,</HI> and <HI>Negations</HI> of &s;ome other things: The very Apprentices in Logick know thus much. 4. But if we know the <HI>E&s;&s;ences</HI> of things in them|&s;elves, as this <HI>M.S.</HI> pretends, if he &s;ay any thing to purpo&s;e, how is it, that there is &s;o great debate about them? as 1. about the <HI>&s;oule</HI> of a man, whether it be <HI>&s;pirituall</HI> or <HI>corporall?</HI> 2. About the <HI>totall E&s;&s;ence</HI> of a man, whether it be the Soule alone? his Soule and Body? the Soule and its <HI>materia prima?</HI> the <HI>union of both,</HI> the <HI>image of God, Religion,</HI> or &s;ome other thing? And to urge this more home upon your Example of the <HI>Light;</HI> If we know the <HI>E&s;&s;ences</HI> of things di&s;tinctly, and in them&s;elves, as I &s;aid, what is the cau&s;e of &s;o great a diver&s;ity, yea of &s;o great a contrariety of opinions about its <HI>E&s;&s;ence</HI> or <HI>Nature?</HI> How is it, that &s;ome Philo&s;ophers hold it to be in &s;ome <HI>Predicament,</HI> others to be in none? &s;ome, to be a <HI>Sub&s;tance,</HI> others an <HI>Accident?</HI> &s;ome, to be a <HI>&s;piri|tuall &s;ub&s;tance,</HI> others, to be a <HI>Body;</HI> others, neither, viz. neither to be a <HI>cor|poreall,</HI> nor a <HI>&s;pirituall,</HI> but a <HI>&s;piritalis &s;ub&s;tantia;</HI> others, the pre&s;ence of a <HI>lu|minous body;</HI> others, a <HI>reall colour;</HI> others, an <HI>apparent colour;</HI> others, a <HI>&s;piri|tuall Quality;</HI> &s;ome, a <HI>naturall power;</HI> others, a <HI>&s;en&s;ible quality?</HI> If we knew it <HI>e&s;&s;entially</HI> and <HI>di&s;tinctly</HI> in it &s;elf, and not meerly <HI>accidentally,</HI> we could not &s;o doubt of its <HI>E&s;&s;ence,</HI> wherein it con&s;i&s;ts. But it &s;eems, that this Man, Doctor <HI>Holmes,</HI> and &s;ome of that Sect, are as Hereticall in Philo&s;ophie, as Schi&s;maticall in Divinitie; and &s;o they have con&s;pired with as little &s;ucce&s;&s;e again&s;t Natu|rall, as again&s;t Divine truth.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> &s;ayes, that my meaning may be, that if a <HI>Toleration</HI> be granted for <HI>In|dependencie,</HI> the Practice of it &s;hould become a Schi&s;me from the <HI>Presbyterian</HI> Church.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> No &s;uch thing; but I maintain, that <HI>Independencie</HI> is already, at lea&s;t <HI>materially,</HI> yea <HI>Formally, ratione Formae e&s;&s;entialis, &amp; in foro Con&s;cientiae interno,</HI> a <HI>&s;chi&s;me</HI> from all the true Churches in the World, &s;ince they willingly have &s;eparated them&s;elves from them all in matter of Sacramentall Communion, as al&s;o in that of Di&s;cipline: And you &s;hould have done well to have an&s;wered this, which no doubt you met with in my former Book; and not oblige me to repeat it here. It will al&s;o be a Schi&s;me <HI>ratione Formae Accidentalis externae, &amp; in fore externo,</HI> from the Church of <HI>England,</HI> if, in Gods mercy, any other <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> then <HI>Independent,</HI> be e&s;tabli&s;hed in it. So is it al&s;o, in re&s;pect of the <HI>Presbyterian</HI> Church, which is already e&s;tabli&s;hed in <HI>France, Holland, &amp;c.</HI>
<PB N="136" REF="74">yea and here in <HI>England,</HI> in the <HI>French, Dutch, Italian,</HI> and <HI>Spani&s;h Churches.</HI> So is it in re&s;pect of the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>Scotland;</HI> the <HI>Di&s;cipline</HI> whereof is approved by the King, which ye have all &s;worne to maintain.</P>
<P>But, &s;ayes he, we have no <HI>Presbyterian Church</HI> among us; and &s;o if a <HI>Tole|ration</HI> be granted, before &s;uch a <HI>Government</HI> be e&s;tabli&s;hed, it is apparently <GAP DESC="foreign"> out of the reach of &s;uch an imputation for ever.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. It is fal&s;e, that we have no <HI>Presbyterian Church</HI> among us; We have it in the <HI>French, Dutch,</HI> and other Churches, wherewith the <HI>Church of England</HI> profe&s;&s;ed evermore a <HI>Sacramentall Communion,</HI> which the <HI>Indepen|dents</HI> break. 2. Whether it be granted by the <HI>Parliament,</HI> or not, that hinders it not from being a <HI>Schi&s;me;</HI> for the <HI>Toleration</HI> of the <HI>Parliament</HI> is alto|gether <HI>extrin&s;ecall</HI> to <HI>Schi&s;me;</HI> and there were Schi&s;mes in the <HI>Primitive Church,</HI> without any <HI>Toleration</HI> of the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate.</HI> 3. His Suppo&s;ition is impious and ridiculous; for <HI>Toleration,</HI> according to M.S. his judgement, is evermore of &s;ome reall, or at lea&s;t of &s;ome apparent Evill: Now, can the <HI>Parliament,</HI> or the <HI>A&s;&s;embly of Divines,</HI> in good Con&s;cience, <HI>tolerate</HI> an <HI>ill Government,</HI> before that they e&s;tabli&s;h any <HI>good one?</HI> Is not that to begin with the Devill to &s;erve him, before that we &s;erve God? Should not the <HI>Parli|ament</HI> begin with You, as the mo&s;t con&s;iderable Party?</P>
<P>A. S. his 4. Rea&s;on. If a <HI>Toleration</HI> be granted to our Brethren, I cannot &s;ee, how it can be well denied to other Sects.</P>
<P>M.S. an&s;wereth, that <HI>Bernardus non videt omnia.</HI></P>
<P>A.S. But I pray you then, Father <HI>Epi&s;temon,</HI> that &s;ees all things, make me, by &s;ome Rea&s;on or other, to &s;ee how it can be denyed to other Sects; for there is the &s;ame Rea&s;on for a Toleration of them all.</P>
<P>M.S. bringeth this Rea&s;on: He (&s;aith he) that keepeth a doore with lock and key, and bolts to it, may let in one man, that knocks, without letting in all commers.</P>
<P>A.S. But if the other knocketh al&s;o, wherefore will he not open to him, and let him in as well as the other? If he open not, there is no <HI>Rea&s;on,</HI> but <HI>Will</HI> that keeps him out; &s;o there is the <HI>&s;ame Rea&s;on,</HI> but not the <HI>&s;ame Will</HI> for both: it is a meere <HI>Pro&s;opolep&s;iia,</HI> or Acceptation of per&s;ons, which is not well done.</P>
<P>If it be &s;aid, that other Sects differ more from us, then the <HI>Independents: An&s;.</HI> 1. It is all one; <HI>Magis &amp; minus non mutant &s;peciem,</HI> in matter of <HI>Tole|ration:</HI> 1. For then all mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated;</HI> how&s;oever &s;ome more, &s;ome le&s;&s;e: 2. And &s;ome of our Brethren, <HI>viz.</HI> M. S. grants all the Argument. 3. And if we di&s;tingui&s;h &s;o, they mu&s;t declare and expound cleerly, what Sects, and what Opinions are to be <HI>tolerated,</HI> and what not: which will be a Que&s;tion inextricable, which no mortall man, appearingly, is able di&s;tinctly to deter|mine.</P>
<P>M. S. an&s;wereth not to any of my Rea&s;ons; only he is offended, that I &s;ay,
<PB N="137" REF="74">it is a Que&s;tion inextricable, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> He &s;ayes then, 1. That I prevaricate with my own Cau&s;e: but wherein, here <HI>altum &s;ilentium.</HI> 2. He &s;aith, that <HI>I put the Magi&s;trate to a &s;tand,</HI> whether he &s;hould <HI>tolerate Presbyterian Government,</HI> or not. But I have already an&s;wered; 1. That it is already approved here in <HI>England,</HI> in the <HI>French, Dutch, Italian,</HI> and <HI>Spani&s;h Churches;</HI> 2. That the <HI>Engli&s;h Divines,</HI> in the name of all this Kingdom, approved it in <HI>Holland.</HI> 3. That the <HI>Kings Maje&s;tie</HI> confirmed it in <HI>Scotland.</HI> 4. That we entertain <HI>Sacramentall Communion</HI> with all the <HI>Prote&s;tant Reformed Churches;</HI> and that the <HI>Independents</HI> alone do quit it. 5. That all the <HI>three Kingdoms,</HI> and the <HI>In|dependents</HI> with them, by their <HI>Covenant and Oath,</HI> are bound to maintain <HI>Presbyteriall Government</HI> in <HI>Scotland.</HI> 6. And they are bound to Reform the <HI>Church</HI> of <HI>England,</HI> according to the example of the be&s;t <HI>Reformed Prote&s;tant Churches,</HI> and namely that of <HI>Scotland,</HI> which all have onely <HI>Presbyterian Government.</HI> 7. And we have &s;ufficiently confirmed it by &s;undry Te&s;timonies of Scripture, and other Arguments, grounded on Scripture. 8. Neither is this his Que&s;tion to the purpo&s;e; for <HI>quae&s;tio quae&s;tionem non &s;olvit:</HI> I ask him what Sects are to be tolerated in a <HI>Kingdom,</HI> wherein the <HI>true Doctrine,</HI> and <HI>true Di&s;cipline,</HI> according to the <HI>publike Judgement,</HI> both of the <HI>State,</HI> and of the <HI>Church,</HI> are <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hed:</HI> I maintain, that no <HI>other,</HI> according to Gods Word, &s;hould be <HI>tolerated:</HI> The <HI>Independents</HI> maintain, that <HI>theirs</HI> &s;hould be <HI>tolera|ted:</HI> I reply; if &s;o; why not others al&s;o? To this <HI>M. S.</HI> can &s;ay nothing, but <HI>will</HI> is the cau&s;e of it, and that <HI>Presbyteriani&s;m,</HI> according to this Rea&s;on, cannot be <HI>tolerated:</HI> I have proved the contrary; and am ready to grant, that if it be a <HI>Sect,</HI> as <HI>theirs</HI> is; or if the <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>State</HI> judge it to be <HI>repugnant</HI> to Gods Word, it &s;hould not be <HI>tolerated;</HI> but &s;o have they not done: yea, they have declared the contrary; the <HI>Parliament</HI> in their <HI>Covenant,</HI> and the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> in <HI>giving thanks</HI> to the <HI>Scots Commi&s;&s;ioners</HI> for their Book. 9. And to be &s;hort, I adjure thee <HI>M. S.</HI> by the reliques of thy Con&s;cience, and pray all men, fearing God, to declare, whether or not, in <HI>taking</HI> of the <HI>Covenant,</HI> and in <HI>&s;wearing</HI> &s;o <HI>&s;olemnly,</HI> according to their power, to put down <HI>Popery, Prelacy,</HI> and all <HI>Schi&s;ms,</HI> they intended to <HI>tolerate them all,</HI> as <HI>M. S.</HI> maintain|eth they &s;hould do.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> asks me, what <HI>Opinions, donandae &s;int Eccle&s;i&acirc;.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> If the Que&s;tion be, what <HI>Opinions</HI> are to be <HI>approved</HI> in the Church in <HI>foro externo;</HI> my An&s;wer is, onely &s;uch as are <HI>approved</HI> by <HI>publike Eccle&s;ia|&s;ticall Authority,</HI> according to Gods ordinary Providence: If the Que&s;tion be, what <HI>Opinions</HI> are to be <HI>tolerated;</HI> then either you mean to be <HI>tolerated</HI> in the Church by <HI>publike Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Authority,</HI> or in <HI>private per&s;ons.</HI> If the fir&s;t, I an&s;wer: <HI>None but &s;uch as Gods Word tolerateth,</HI> and the <HI>Church judgeth to be true,</HI> or not <HI>repugnant to the Word;</HI> If the &s;econd, I an&s;wer, That, that depends upon the <HI>Circum&s;tances</HI> of <HI>Time, Per&s;ons, Place,</HI> and other, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<PB N="138" REF="75">
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. No fal&s;e <HI>Opinions</HI> are to be <HI>tolerated</HI> by any <HI>po&s;itive Toleration, Con&s;ent</HI> or <HI>Approbation.</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM>2. If men erre for want of <HI>light,</HI> much may be <HI>tolerated negativ&egrave;, i. e.</HI> In not proceeding &s;everely again&s;t them, till they be &s;ufficiently convicted, in ca&s;e they give no offence to the Church of God; but if they give offence, they mu&s;t be puni&s;hed condignly; and after a &s;ufficient morall Conviction, they may be puni&s;hed condignly, both by the Church, and the Civill Magi&s;trate, if they continue and become pertinacious. And becau&s;e, I adde, That the le&s;&s;e the difference be, the greater is the Schi&s;m.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<P><HI>M. S. pag.</HI> 89. <HI>An&s;wer</HI> 5. telleth us, That the man [&s;peaking of me] know|eth not what Schi&s;m is.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> It a &s;trange thing, that having given &s;o cleer a Definition of Schi&s;m, he &s;hould &s;o doubt: <HI>M. S.</HI> Either grant my Definition to be true, and &s;o grant, that I know it; or deny it, and I &s;hall, God willing, make it good: But it is but a &s;mall matter, what I know, or know not, whether I be igno|rant, or not; for that is no wayes materiall, or to the purpo&s;e: The le&s;&s;e I know, and the more ignorant I am, the more ea&s;ie is it for &s;uch an Epi&s;temon, as <HI>M. S.</HI> is, to refute me. Come to the point I pray thee, good <HI>M. S;</HI> The rea&s;on of this my A&s;&s;ertion is this, <HI>viz.</HI> The le&s;&s;e the difference be betwixt In|dependency, and the true <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> that is to be e&s;tabli&s;hed, whether it be <HI>Presbyteriall Government,</HI> or any other, the greater is the <HI>breach of Charity,</HI> and <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Communion,</HI> in making &s;o great a Schi&s;m, and Separation from the true <HI>Church of God,</HI> for &s;o &s;mall a matter. If it be &s;o, ye your &s;elves mu&s;t make a Separation among your &s;elves, for every trifle wherein ye differ in judgement, either in <HI>Doctrine, Di&s;cipline,</HI> or <HI>Holine&s;&s;e of life,</HI> one from an|other, which ye do not; or if ye be minded to do &s;o, ye mu&s;t make all men in your Churches, of your minde, in every Opinion ye have, or el&s;e, I pray, tell me, for what Opinions ye are minded to make a Schi&s;m, and what not.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> his third Rea&s;on: God in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament</HI> granted no <HI>Toleration</HI> of divers <HI>Religions,</HI> or <HI>Di&s;ciplines. Ergo,</HI> It is not to be granted in the <HI>New,</HI> &s;ince the <HI>New Te&s;tament</HI> requireth no le&s;&s;e Union among Chri&s;tians, then the <HI>Old</HI> among Jews.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. p.</HI> 89. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. 1. denyeth the Con&s;equence; and the Proof brought by me he granteth: So my Conclu&s;ion mu&s;t hold: Onely he &s;aith, it is ill applyed; but it is applyed by way of Argumentation; whereof he would have done well, to have &s;hewn the defect.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. pag.</HI> 90. and 91. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 4. yet doth it not require, That he that is &s;tronger &s;hould cudgell him that is weaker.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> God be thanked, ye need not much complain of any cudgelling, that ye have yet received, &s;ince this <HI>Parliament;</HI> neither need ye to fear it, in time to come, if ye force not a new Religion upon the Kingdom, again&s;t their will,
<PB N="139" REF="75">or if ye will &s;ubmit unto <HI>lawfull Authority;</HI> and not make your incon&s;iderable number the Judges of all this bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, again&s;t the <HI>Laws</HI> of the <HI>Kingdom:</HI> And what you &s;aid in your &s;econd Chapter, we have &s;hewn, how ab&s;urd it is, and how horrible impieties will follow upon your Tenets.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. p.</HI> 89. in his 1. and 2. <HI>An&s;wers</HI> to the <HI>Con&s;equence,</HI> is, That it follow|eth not. Dare you &s;ay, in matters of <HI>knowledge, authority,</HI> and <HI>power, Ero &s;i|milis Alti&s;&s;imo,</HI> remember the fall of the Son of the morning.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> We pretend not to be like unto God, in the&s;e con&s;iderations, in going again&s;t the Command, as <HI>Lucifer;</HI> but in holine&s;&s;e, as he is holy, which cannot be without obedience, as in the <HI>good Angels;</HI> Now ye confe&s;&s;e your &s;elves, That God hath onely commanded one <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> and <HI>Government,</HI> in the <HI>Church</HI> under the <HI>New Te&s;tament;</HI> how are we then <HI>Lucifers,</HI> in de&s;iring this onely; and no other to be admitted of in the <HI>Church?</HI> How do ye then plead for the Introduction of any other, then the <HI>true Di&s;cipline?</HI> If <HI>Baal</HI> be God, &s;erve him; but if <HI>Jehovah</HI> be God, &s;erve him: So if Independency be the Ordinance of God, let it be admitted, and no other; and &s;o of Presby|teriall, and all other Government. We impo&s;e none, but de&s;ire, that the <HI>true Di&s;cipline</HI> may be &s;ought for, and afterwards impo&s;ed by the <HI>Parliament</HI> and the <HI>Church;</HI> by each of them, according to their Vocation.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;econd <HI>An&s;wer, p.</HI> 89. is, That he denyeth the Antecedent of my Argument, or rather di&s;tingui&s;hes it, <HI>viz.</HI> That in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament</HI> it was not granted <HI>in terminis,</HI> but <HI>in &s;en&s;u,</HI> or by con&s;equence (for this mu&s;t be the other part of his Di&s;tinction) becau&s;e he prohibited all manner of violence, and oppre&s;&s;ion, and charged the rich not to en&s;lave the poor.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Reply. 1. This is no Law of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government, or of To|leration of Here&s;ies, Schi&s;ms, or divers Di&s;ciplines in the Church; but a Mo|rall Law, and a part of the &s;ixth Commandment, in not offering violence to the weaker; And of the eighth, <HI>Thou &s;halt not &s;teal,</HI> forbidding all &s;ort of Extortion again&s;t the poor: Now ye are not poor, neither is there any man, either of the Parliament or Synod, about to take your Pur&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Yet the Equity, and &s;pirit of &s;uch Laws, extend to &s;piritualls.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. Your Argument is &s;o &s;pirituall, that we cannot under&s;tand it; <HI>Theologia &s;ymbolica non e&s;t argumentativa.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. We &s;ay, it is no violence, to oblige all to be &s;ubject unto Gods Ordinances.</P>
<P N="3">3. And to deny a <HI>Toleration</HI> to them, that are contrary, for by the &s;ame rea&s;on all Theeves &s;hould be <HI>tolerated,</HI> and it &s;hould be forbidden to puni&s;h them.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> telleth us, <HI>pag.</HI> 90. in ca&s;e the <HI>Minor</HI> part in that Nation, had di&s;|&s;ented from the <HI>Major,</HI> about the &s;ence of &s;uch or &s;uch a Law, relating unto practi&s;e, and &s;o had di&s;&s;ented in this practi&s;e: In ca&s;e the <HI>Major</HI> part had taken the advantage of their Brethrens weakne&s;&s;e, and becau&s;e they were fewer in number, &s;hould have forced them again&s;t the light of their judge|ments
<PB N="140" REF="76">to have altered their practi&s;e, or if they refu&s;ed, &s;hould have trodden and trampled upon them, it &s;hould have been as apparent a breach of the Laws we &s;peak of, as any oppre&s;&s;ion in Civill Proceedings.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> If the Major part, In &s;uch a ca&s;e, had oppre&s;&s;ed the Minor part, in con&s;ideration of their weakne&s;&s;e, or becau&s;e of their weakne&s;&s;e, it would have been true; but if the Major part in not forcing the Minor, to be Actors in any thing again&s;t their con&s;cience, had hindered it from bringing in of a new Religion, and a new Di&s;cipline, again&s;t that, which was ordained by God, it had been no oppre&s;&s;ion, no violence, but an act of obedience to their God. And as for that pretext of the tenderne&s;&s;e of Con&s;cience, it is the common refuge of all Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks of the World: Your pre|tended tenderne&s;&s;e of <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word">, were it never &s;o tender, ought not to prejudice Gods Law, ye mu&s;t learn Obedience unto Gods Word, if ye pretend to be his <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word">; and ye mu&s;t learn, that every man mu&s;t not do as &s;eemeth good in his own eyes, but that the Spirit of Prophets, in publike Government, mu&s;t be &s;ubject unto the Prophets; otherwayes all &s;hall go in confu&s;ion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> telleth us again, That to con&s;cientious men, Civill Liberty, without Liberty of Con&s;cience, is of little value.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> The greate&s;t Liberty, that Con&s;cientious men can de&s;ire, is to &s;erve God, and to obey his Ordinances; and what is be&s;ide that, is not Liberty, but Licenciou&s;ne&s;&s;e: If ye value not &s;uch a Liberty, ye are not worthy of it? You may have Liberty of Con&s;cience, howbeit ye e&s;tabli&s;h no <HI>new Di&s;cipline</HI> in the Kingdom.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> his 3. <HI>An&s;w. p.</HI> 90. Though God gave no &s;uch <HI>Toleration,</HI> as you &s;peak of, by <HI>Law,</HI> yet he did actually <HI>tolerate</HI> for a long time together, with much patience, not onely a Minor, but a Major part of the Jewi&s;h Nation, in a man|ner the whole Nation fourty yeers, in opinions note riou&s;ly &s;infull, <HI>Act.</HI> 13.18. So then you mu&s;t <HI>tolerate</HI> your Brethren, not onely in &s;ome Opinions and Practi&s;es, which are Dialectically and Topically evill, but even al&s;o in tho&s;e, which are Demon&s;tratively &s;uch; if you will follow the practi&s;e of God.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer, 1. to the <HI>Antecedent,</HI> That God <HI>tolerated</HI> not the <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> in their &s;in ab&s;olutely; for &s;undry times he puni&s;hed their &s;ins, and that very grievou&s;ly with pe&s;tilence, mortality, and making of them a prey unto their Enemies, till &s;uch time as they repented and turned from their &s;in unto him, and then he turned his anger from them; yea, <HI>Core, Dathan, Abiron,</HI> and their Adherents, for their Schi&s;m, were &s;wallowed up quick by the Earth; and <HI>Aaron</HI> and <HI>Mirian,</HI> &s;trucken with Lepro&s;ie; and God kept them all in the Wilderne&s;&s;e, as in a Pri&s;on, for the &s;pace of fourty yeers, and &s;uffered none of them to enter into the <HI>Land of Promi&s;e:</HI> Onely he <HI>tolerated</HI> them, in not puni&s;hing them by eternall death, or <HI>ex condigno.</HI> 2. Neither did God make any Law in favour of their &s;in, to <HI>tolerate</HI> it, as the <HI>Independents</HI> require here.
<PB N="141" REF="76">3. Howbeit, God him&s;elf <HI>tolerated</HI> much in them, yet ordained he not, that <HI>Church-men</HI> and the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> &s;hould <HI>tolerate</HI> them, but commanded them both to oppo&s;e, every one according to their Vocation, and ordained &s;undry puni&s;hments again&s;t &s;uch kindes of &s;in in<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="3 letters"> Law.</P>
<P N="2">2. I deny the Con&s;equence. 1. For God is the Soveraign Legi&s;lator, or Lawgiver, who may di&s;pence with his own Law, and remit &s;in committed a|gain&s;t it, but &s;o cannot we. 2. Becau&s;e we are &s;ubject to the Law, and mu&s;t obey it; &s;o is it not with God. 3. We are bound by a particular Obligation, and Duty, to put it in execution; &s;o is it not of God. 4. By the &s;ame rea&s;on, ye may conclude as well, That we mu&s;t pardon &s;ins, give our Children to death for other mens &s;ins, or create a World, if we will follow Gods pra|cti&s;e: 5. Gods practi&s;e is not to be followed by man, but in that, which is conform to his Law, and his revealed Word; For <HI>Chri&s;ts Church</HI> is a Coun|try, wherein his people live not, by cu&s;tome, or imitation of practi&s;e, but by Law: Wherefore &s;ince there is no Law for <HI>Toleration</HI> of Here&s;ies and &s;ins, they mu&s;t not be <HI>tolerated.</HI> 6. I retort your Argument; for &s;ince God puni&s;hed his people grievou&s;ly in tho&s;e fourty yeers in the Wilderne&s;&s;e, for their &s;in; &s;o &s;hould men now be puni&s;hed for it. 7. And &s;ince <HI>Core, Dathan, Abiron,</HI> and their <HI>Adherents,</HI> for their Schi&s;ms, and complaints again&s;t <HI>Authoritative Power,</HI> were puni&s;hed by death; &s;o &s;hould &s;uch &s;inners now a dayes be &s;o puni&s;hed in like manner. 8. And &s;ince the <HI>I&s;raelites</HI> were not permitted to enter into the Land of <HI>Canaan,</HI> which was a Type of the <HI>Chri&s;tian Church,</HI> no more &s;hould Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, and other &s;inners, have liberty to enter into the <HI>Chri&s;tian Church;</HI> for in &s;o doing, we &s;hould imitate God. 9. If this Argument hold, all Adulteries, Poligamies, Drunkenne&s;&s;e, Glut|tony, Idolatry, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated</HI> in the <HI>New Te&s;tament;</HI> &s;ince God <HI>tole|rated</HI> &s;uch &s;ins, tho&s;e fourty yeers, in his people, when they were in the Wil|derne&s;&s;e: I am exceedingly a&s;hamed of you <HI>M. S.</HI> that you &s;hould be &s;o ab|&s;urd and impious, as to plead thus for impiety, and all &s;orts of Here&s;ie; and to hinder the Civill Magi&s;trate, &s;o far as in you lyeth, from puni&s;hing &s;inners.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 6. Rea&s;on was: Either our Brethren do a&s;&s;ent to our <HI>Doctrine,</HI> and are re&s;olved likewi&s;e to a&s;&s;ent to the <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> which God willing, &s;hall be e&s;tabli&s;hed by common Con&s;ent, or do not: If they grant the fir&s;t, what need they any other <HI>Toleration,</HI> then the re&s;t? If the &s;econd, it would be fir&s;t di&s;|cu&s;&s;ed, wherein they are re&s;olved to di&s;&s;ent; and afterwards con&s;idered, whether it be of &s;o great importance, that in con&s;ideration thereof, they dare not, in good con&s;cience, entertain communion with us.</P>
<P><HI>M. S. An&s;wer</HI> 1, Scarce &s;ee we any face of Rea&s;on in it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. And yet, if ye have any skill in Logick, ye may &s;ee a Disjunctive Syllogi&s;m here.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>M. S.</HI> here fal&s;ifies my Rea&s;on; for in&s;tead of the&s;e words, <HI>The Di&s;|cipline,
<PB N="142" REF="77">which &s;hall, &amp;c.</HI> he puts in <HI>your Di&s;cipline,</HI> viz. <HI>Presbyteriall Authori|ty:</HI> which are not mine, but his own words.</P>
<P N="3">3. Having &s;o fal&s;ified my words, he di&s;tingui&s;hes his own phancies, or words, <HI>viz. To a&s;&s;ent to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 word"> Di&s;cipline,</HI> in this manner: <HI>If your meaning be in ca&s;e,</HI> they <HI>a&s;&s;ent to your Doctrine, and are re&s;olved to a&s;&s;ent to your Di&s;cipline,</HI> viz. <HI>Immediately, when it hath but the &s;tamp of Presbyteriall Authority &s;et upon it, we are of your minde, but &s;o even the Presbyteriall Party &s;tandeth in need of a Toleration, as well as ours: But if your meaning be, that a re&s;olution</HI> in your Brethren <HI>(the Apologi&s;ts)</HI> to a&s;&s;ent to your <HI>Di&s;cipline, viz. When, and a&s;&s;oon as they can po&s;&s;ibly &s;atisfie them&s;elves, touching the lawfulne&s;&s;e of it, it will exempt them from a nece&s;&s;ity of Toleration.</HI></P>
<P>As for the fir&s;t part of his Di&s;tinction: 1. It is not true, that <HI>Presbyteriall Di&s;cipline</HI> will &s;tand in need of a <HI>Toleration;</HI> for what ever be concluded, it cannot &s;tand in need of a <HI>Toleration,</HI> &s;ince it is already approved, as I have already &s;hewed; unle&s;&s;e the <HI>Parliament</HI> and <HI>A&s;&s;embly of Divines</HI> recall that precedent Approbation.</P>
<P N="2">2. Neither by a Re&s;olution, mean I a precipitated Re&s;olution to A&s;&s;ent, as you mean in the fir&s;t part of your Di&s;tinction; nor a Re&s;olution to A&s;&s;ent, when ye are &s;atisfied your &s;elves, as you mean in the &s;econd part; for God knoweth, what can, or will &s;atisfie pertinacious men; but a Re&s;olution to A&s;&s;ent and Obey, after that ye have received &s;ufficient &s;atisfaction Morally, by the <HI>Synod,</HI> in all their Conclu&s;ions and Determinations: I &s;ay Morally, for God alone, who hath created the &s;oul of man, can &s;atisfie its under&s;tanding, and will, Phy&s;ically: And if ye A&s;&s;ent not to it, ye may be ju&s;tly condemned, as Schi&s;maticks, at lea&s;t: And if it were not &s;o, no Judgement could be concluded in any Judicatory of this World, neither Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall or Politicall; yea, not in the Independent Congregations them&s;elves: For he, that is to be condemned, will evermore &s;ay, That he is not &s;atisfied with the Iudgement, if he hope to e&s;cape &s;o.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> That you adde, is very incongruous, &amp;c. 1. We marvell who yee meane, &amp;c.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But others, who are not <HI>Independents,</HI> will not marvell: And if you be &s;o dull and blocki&s;h as yee would &s;eem to be, I will help you; My meaning is this, That if yee be not minded to a&s;&s;ent to the Di&s;cipline, which the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> God willing, &s;hall e&s;tabli&s;h, (as it &s;eems ye are not, as appear|eth by your Bookes, and your &s;uing thus for a <HI>Toleration,</HI> and in declaring how yee are minded to die in your <HI>Independency,</HI> what ever may befall you) Then the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> having given their Iudgement, and concluded upon &s;ome form of Di&s;cipline, mu&s;t di&s;cu&s;&s;e the points, wherein yee di&s;cent from their De|terminations, and con&s;ider, whether they be &s;uch, as in good Con&s;cience, ye cannot entertain <HI>Communion</HI> with us: and &s;o proceed to a Iudgement again&s;t you all, according as your Opinions may de&s;erve.</P>
<PB N="143" REF="77">
<P>Whereas, you &s;ay, How &s;hould you re&s;olve before hand? And yet <HI>M. S.</HI> him&s;elfe, as we have &s;een it under his hand, in this Booke, is re&s;olved to &s;uffer all things, rather then to quit his Opinion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> We grant, that men of good abilities, and con&s;cience, may draw up a very &s;atisfactory Re&s;olution, concerning &s;uch, or &s;uch a <HI>Ca&s;e,</HI> or practice, about which I am &s;cru pled; but it will not follow from hence, that therefore this Re&s;olution will be &s;atisfactory unto me, or that I with a good con&s;cience, may walke by it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> It will not follow, that this Re&s;olution will be &s;atisfactory unto you, but it will follow, that it &s;hould be, and that with good con&s;cience you &s;hould walke by it: And con&s;equently, that if you be not &s;atisfied with that, which &s;hould &s;atisfie you, and in good con&s;cience walke by that, whereby you &s;hould walke, you &s;hould be puni&s;hed; For you mu&s;t learne to be &s;atisfied with that which is &s;atisfactory; now it is your &s;in, not to be &s;atisfied with that, which is &s;atisfactory; and I &s;ee not how this &s;in can excu&s;e another &s;in pro|ceeding from it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 7. They are not pre&s;&s;ed to be Actors in any thing again&s;t their con|&s;ciences. <HI>Ergo,</HI> They neede not to be &s;uitors for a <HI>Toleration:</HI> or if they be, it ju&s;tly may be refu&s;ed.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> Pag. 92. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> 1. He denieth the Con&s;equence of this Argument.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But I prove it: For the Parliament being re&s;olved, and having enjoyned the A&s;&s;embly to &s;eeke out, and give their Iudgements, what Di&s;cipline is mo&s;t conforme unto Gods Word, which can be but one, and that we being all &s;worn by <HI>Covenant</HI> to e&s;tabli&s;h and pre&s;erve it, and to oppo&s;e all <HI>Here&s;ie</HI> and <HI>Schi&s;me,</HI> there is no doore open for more then one true Di&s;cipline: And &s;o, this <HI>Hypothe&s;is</HI> being granted, I argue thus; &s;uppo&s;ing we cannot have any more but one Di&s;cipline, &amp;c. and that thereby <HI>Independents</HI> are not pre&s;|&s;ed to be Actors in any thing again&s;t their Con&s;ciences, they neede not be Suitors for a <HI>Toleration:</HI> But the fir&s;t is true, as appeareth by our <HI>Cove|nant,</HI> and the <HI>Ordinance</HI> of the <HI>Parliament. Ergo,</HI> The <HI>Connexion</HI> in the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition is evident; For, if they &s;tand in need to be Suitors for any &s;uch <HI>Toleration,</HI> they con&s;equently have neede to be Suitors for <HI>Perjury,</HI> and a breach of the <HI>Nationall Covenant,</HI> whereby we have all &s;worn the contrary.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> bringeth his Rea&s;on, wherefore they mu&s;t be Suitors for &s;uch a <HI>Toleration,</HI> again&s;t the <HI>Covenant,</HI> and the <HI>Parliaments Ordinance,</HI> viz. That &s;o they may be Actors in good, according to their <HI>Con&s;ciences.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. So to be Suitors for a liberty, that they may perjure them&s;elves in breaking of their <HI>Covenant,</HI> and the <HI>Parliaments Ordinance,</HI> is to be Suitors for good. 2. <HI>M. S.</HI> here beggeth the que&s;tion, viz. That there is no good Di&s;cipline, but <HI>Independency;</HI> and what&s;oever is, or &s;hall be concluded, that yet the <HI>Independent</HI> way mu&s;t hold, and they be Suitors for it. 3. We have proved heretofore, that it is not good, but very pernicious, and by con|&s;equence
<PB N="144" REF="78">more dangerous then many <HI>Here&s;ies;</HI> yea then <HI>Lutherani&s;me, Po|pery</HI> or <HI>Arminian&s;me.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> addeth, <HI>It would be a greater honor to your Presbytery, then the contrary peremtoriou&s;ne&s;&s;e is like to be, viz.</HI> To be Suitors for a <HI>Toleration</HI> of <HI>Independency.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Oh, how much are we beholding to you, good <HI>M. S.</HI> for your pains, in teaching the <HI>Presbytery</HI> a point of honour, to perjure them&s;elves by violat|ing their <HI>Covenant,</HI> and the <HI>Parliaments Ordinance.</HI> God keepe us from your <HI>greater honour,</HI> and give us grace to performe our <HI>&V;owes</HI> unto the Lord.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> The Apologi&s;ts conceave, there is a nece&s;&s;ity upon them, to &s;ave the Soules of others, as well as their own.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. There is no nece&s;&s;ity laid upon them to &s;ave Soules, by &s;uch meanes as are not the way to &s;ave other mens Soules, but the ready way to damne their owne. 2. And is there no other way to &s;ave them, but by <HI>Independency?</HI> 3. If yee conceive &s;o, then if other men conceive a nece&s;&s;ity laid upon them to &s;ave &s;oules, by &s;uppre&s;&s;ing of <HI>Independency,</HI> they mu&s;t nece&s;&s;arily &s;uppre&s;&s;e it: 4. Your conceits mu&s;t not be taken for Rules, whereby the <HI>Parliament,</HI> and the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> mu&s;t be guided.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> In his &s;econd <HI>An&s;w.</HI> denieth the Antecedent of my Argument, or doubteth of it, and asketh by what Authority I undertake to &s;ecure them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. It is an untruth, that I undertake to &s;ecure them; I under|take nothing, but tell a truth. 2. And if I lye, I pray <HI>M. S.</HI> to &s;hew me, where ever the <HI>Parliament</HI> or <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> hath pre&s;&s;ed them, to be Actors a|gain&s;t their Con&s;cience. 3. And yet, however I have no Authority to &s;ecure them, yet have I Rea&s;on &s;ufficient enough to prove it; For if their Con&s;ciences be weake, or tender, the <HI>Parliament</HI> declareth, and hath de|clared their care and re&s;olution, not to &s;uffer weake or tender Con&s;ciences to be wronged, or pre&s;&s;ed to be Actors again&s;t the Dictats thereof: And if yee cannot beleeve or tru&s;t them, how can they, or &s;hall they tru&s;t you? 4. Be|cau&s;e it is an ordinary Maxime among&s;t Presbyterians, <HI>Not to per&s;ecute men for their Con&s;ciences,</HI> nor to accu&s;e them to the Civill Magi&s;trate, unle&s;&s;e they be turbulent, and trouble the peace of the Church or State. As for your jeeres and injurious &s;peeches here again&s;t Presbyterians, we pardon Mr. <HI>Goodwins</HI> temperament; for it is not Rea&s;on, nor the Man, but the Humour of the Man, that &s;peaketh.</P>
<P>M. S. <HI>p.</HI> 93. bringeth his 3. An&s;wer to the Antecedent, That this Promi&s;e is broken by A. S. &s;even times in his Di&s;cour&s;e, and by &s;undry others of his Party.</P>
<P>A. S. 1. The Antecedent of my Argument conteined no Promi&s;e, but a &s;imple Enunciation; and therefore I could not break any Promi&s;e therein conteined; for, <HI>Non Entis nulla &s;unt Accidentia;</HI> and what never was, could never be broken. 2. Put the ca&s;e, it were a Promi&s;e made by me, How, or wherein
<PB N="147" REF="78">have I ever, or could I pre&s;&s;e any of you to be Actors again&s;t your Con&s;ci|ences? 3. As much may I &s;ay of others. 4. But to &s;ay, <HI>it is again&s;t your Con&s;ci|ences,</HI> is an old &s;hift an hundred times made u&s;e of, and as oft an&s;wered. 5. We have never heard of any that threatned you, and therefore we cannot an&s;wer this accu&s;ation. We know of &s;undry extraordinary favours put upon you by this <HI>Parliament;</HI> but nothing of &s;o many threatnings of mi&s;eries a|gain&s;t you; unle&s;&s;e you account it your mi&s;ery, to receive good fat Benefices, and to be well paid for many Lectures up and down, by very many, whom it is well known, you &s;carce own for members of your Church; and &s;o doe clip the wooll off the &s;heeps backs, that are not of your flocks.</P>
<P>A.S. <HI>Arg.</HI> 8. It is again&s;t the Nature of the Communion of Saints, to live in Sects apart, without communicating at the Lords Table; which very hardly will be avoyded, if a <HI>Toleration</HI> be granted.</P>
<P>M. S. reduceth this my Argument unto this Hypotheticall Propo&s;ition, viz. <HI>If it be again&s;t the nature of the Communion of Saints, to live in Sects a|part, without communicating at the Lords Table; then ought not the Apologi&s;ts to be tolerated: But, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>A.S. But M.S. is not &s;o good an Analy&s;er of Arguments, as I took him to be: he faileth here, 1. in reducing it unto an Hypotheticall Propo&s;ition, which po&s;eth nothing ab&s;olutely, as this my Argument doth. 2. He maketh the Antecedent the Con&s;equent, and the Con&s;equent the Antecedent; for who &s;eeth not, that in reducing of it to an Hypotheticall Propo&s;ition, that mu&s;t be the Antecedent, which is joyned with the Hypotheticall Conjunction <HI>(if)</HI> viz. <HI>If</HI> Toleration be granted: and that the Con&s;equent, that is inferred upon it, viz. <HI>It will be again&s;t the nature of the Communion of Saints.</HI> 3. But to help him, and to make him to &s;ee its face, I will reduce it into a Syllogi&s;me, which is &s;uch:</P>
<P>What is again&s;t the <HI>Communion of Saints,</HI> is not to be granted:</P>
<P>But <HI>Toleration,</HI> viz. of <HI>Independencie,</HI> is again&s;t the <HI>Communion of Saints:</HI></P>
<P><HI>Ergo, Toleration</HI> is not to be granted.</P>
<P>The Major is certaine; neither will M.S. deny it.</P>
<P>The Minor is proved thus:
<LIST>
<ITEM>To live in Sects apart, without Communicating at the Lords Table, is again&s;t the <HI>Communion of Saints:</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Toleration</HI> is to live in Sects apart, without Communicating at the Lords Table: <HI>Ergo,</HI></ITEM>
<ITEM><HI>Toleration</HI> is again&s;t the <HI>Communion of Saints.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST></P>
<P>M.S. an&s;wereth, denying the Minor of the &s;econd Argument:</P>
<P>But A. S. (&s;aith he) doe you conceive, that men would, under <HI>Toleration,</HI> live without communicating at the Lords Table?</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> But good Mr. <HI>M.S.</HI> 1. Howbeit they live not without communicating at the Lords Table ab&s;olutely, in &s;o far forth, as tho&s;e of one Congregation
<PB N="148" REF="79">communicate, or may communicate together; yet live they without commu|nicating at the Lords Table, <HI>&s;ecundum quid,</HI> in &s;ome re&s;pect, <HI>viz.</HI> in &s;o far, as according to the Maximes of <HI>Independency,</HI> tho&s;e of one Congregation among&s;t you, can have no right to communicate in another Congregation; much le&s;&s;e will ye admit the members of our Churches to communicate in yours, or ye your &s;elves comunicate in ours, whom ye take up on you to reckon in the num|ber of your Si&s;ter-Churches. Now we conceive, that according to Scripture, it is a part of the Communion of Saints, that all the members of the vi&s;ible Church here upon Earth, have right, in vertue of their &s;pirituall fraternitie in Chri&s;t, to communicate one with another at the Lords Table, when occa&s;ion is offered. It is not true, that the Communion at the Lords Table is all the breach of the Communion of Saints that <HI>Toleration</HI> breedeth, for it is al&s;o again&s;t the Communion in Di&s;cipline, and in Chri&s;tian Conver&s;ation, at lea&s;t, <HI>per &s;e,</HI> or of it &s;elfe.</P>
<P>His 2. An&s;wer is: If living in Sects apart be &s;o offen&s;ive (&s;aith he) to your zeale over the Communion of Saints, why doe you not rather mediate a <HI>Tole|ration</HI> for them, then oppo&s;e it?</P>
<P>A.S. 1. My credit is but &s;mall, as you confe&s;&s;e your &s;elf. 2. Howbeit, were it as great, as it is &s;mall, yet hope I, I &s;hould never &s;o far abu&s;e it, as to turne a Me|diator for the &s;etting up of Sects. 3. To your Quaere, I an&s;wer, It &s;hould be wickedly done to mediate for the &s;etting up of Sects; becau&s;e to mediate for it, were to mediate for the overthrow of the Communion of Saints.</P>
<P>M. S. If you &s;hall &s;uffer them to work with you, they will be &s;o much the more free to eat and drink with you.</P>
<P>A.S. We are not &s;o carefull for your eating and drinking, for ye may eat and drink with Epicures &amp; Pagans, as well as with us: but for your &s;pirituall Com|munion, which cannot be maintained, if ye have a Toleration to be &s;eparated from us, and one of you from another into particular Conventicles.</P>
<P>A. S. <HI>Arg.</HI> 9. Becau&s;e the Scripture exhorts us evermore unto <HI>&V;nity;</HI> which cannot be ea&s;ily procured by a Toleration of <HI>Sects;</HI> and cannot but beget new Schi&s;mes and Divi&s;ions.</P>
<P>M. S. denieth the Con&s;equence; and &s;uppo&s;eth, that the force of my Rea|&s;on con&s;i&s;teth in this, viz. That if the Unitie, whereunto the Scripture exhorts us, cannot be procured by <HI>Toleration, Toleration</HI> is not to be granted.</P>
<P>A. S. But he is deceived, or rather treacherou&s;ly deceiveth others; for he &s;hould have added the re&s;t, viz. <HI>Which cannot, &amp;c.</HI> for if it begets Sects and Schi&s;mes, it mu&s;t de&s;troy the unity of the Church. I &s;ay nothing to the Hyperbolicall prai&s;es he giveth to tho&s;e of his Sect; They will doubtle&s;ly doe as much for him againe.</P>
<P>M.S. perceiving this, An&s;wereth, 2. That howbeit <HI>Toleration</HI> of <HI>Sects</HI> can|not but beget new Schi&s;mes and Divi&s;ions, yet it is to be granted; for many Sickne&s;&s;es are in the world, that come by <HI>eating</HI> &amp; <HI>drinking,</HI> yet are the&s;e to be tolerated.</P>
<PB N="149" REF="79">
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> If <HI>Toleration, per &s;e,</HI> begets them, it is not to be <HI>tolerated;</HI> for that, which is <HI>in &s;e,</HI> and of its own nature, the cau&s;e of Evill, is evill; at lea&s;t, it is not to be <HI>tolerated</HI> po&s;itively, by Approbation, Con&s;ent, &amp;c. for we mu&s;t not approve Sin, or con&s;ent thereunto; but we are bound to hinder it &s;o far as in us lyeth. As for your <HI>Simile,</HI> it is altogether <HI>di&s;&s;imile;</HI> for Sickne&s;&s;es are not Sins, but Naturall Evils, which are not forbidden by Nature; neither hath God ever &s;aid to man, <HI>Thou &s;halt not be &s;ick;</HI> as he &s;aith, <HI>Thou &s;halt not kill:</HI> Neither is it in our power, to avoyd Sickne&s;&s;e, as Sin: Neither is it <HI>eating</HI> or <HI>drinking,</HI> but too much, or too little <HI>eating</HI> or <HI>drinking,</HI> that maketh us &s;ick; and therefore they are al&s;o forbidden, and not to be tolerated or ap|proved.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 3. denieth, 1. that they plead for a <HI>toleration</HI> of any <HI>Sect:</HI> and 2. that they are a <HI>Sect.</HI></P>
<P>But if a <HI>Sect</HI> be &s;o called <HI>&agrave; &s;ecande,</HI> for cutting them&s;elves off from the true Churches Communion, as they have done, and as we have already demon&s;tra|ted it, they mu&s;t be a <HI>Sect,</HI> and con&s;equently plead for a <HI>Sect.</HI> I will not an|&s;wer to this <HI>M.S.</HI> his braggings; for I am only for to re&s;olve his Sophi&s;ticati|ons: He doth well, not to compare the <HI>Apologi&s;me</HI> with <HI>A. S.</HI> which is <HI>Adam Steuart;</HI> but with <HI>A&s;&s;i&s;me;</HI> for they are liker to the one, then to the o|ther.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 4. Whereas you &s;ay, that a <HI>toleration</HI> of <HI>Sects</HI> cannot but daily beget new Schi&s;mes, &amp;c. We an&s;wer, that Gods <HI>toleration</HI> or <HI>long-&s;uffering</HI> towards &s;inners, doth not only <HI>lead</HI> all &s;inners <HI>to repentance,</HI> but al&s;o bring many there|unto: And why &s;hould not Mans <HI>toleration</HI> expect an effect an&s;werable there|unto?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> What &s;hall I &s;ay to &s;uch Impieties? 1. I deny the Con&s;equence. 2. And, if this be true, then if Gods <HI>toleration</HI> of Idolatrie, Ince&s;t, Sin again&s;t Nature, of Sacrilege, Wars, and all &s;orts of violence and mi&s;chiefe, bringeth men unto Repentance; wherefore &s;hould not Mans <HI>toleration</HI> expect an an&s;werable effect? 3. The rea&s;on wherefore it &s;hould not expect an an&s;wer|able effect, is, becau&s;e we have not received power of God to <HI>tolerate</HI> Crimes, nor have we it in our &s;elves, as he hath it. 4. We are bound to hinder &s;inne, &s;o far forth as in us lieth. 5. He hath given a Law unto Men, not to <HI>tolerate,</HI> but to puni&s;h and hinder them. 6. If &s;o, then <HI>M. S.</HI> and his <HI>Sect</HI> mu&s;t <HI>toltrate</HI> Brothel-hou&s;es, and all &s;ort of mi&s;chiefe. 7. If Gods <HI>toleration</HI> bringeth &s;in|ners to <HI>Repentance,</HI> is it not of it &s;elfe, but by accident, in vertue of &s;ome Mercy and Grace annexed thereunto; which if we could give, as God can, we &s;hould not be peradventure &s;o much blamed, in <HI>tolerating</HI> of &s;inne: but that can we not doe. 8. Neither doth God <HI>tolerate</HI> &s;innes po&s;itively by Law, Con&s;ent, or Approbation thereof, &s;uch as the <HI>Independents</HI> are Suiters for; but <HI>negatively,</HI> in not hindring of it Extraordinarily, in a way out of his ordinary Providence of Nature, or of Grace: <HI>Ergo,</HI> no more &s;hould the State, Chri&s;tian Magi|&s;trate,
<PB N="148" REF="80"><GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="149" REF="80"><GAP DESC="duplicate" EXTENT="1 page">
<PB N="150" REF="81">or the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Senate <HI>tolerate</HI> it Po&s;itively: And then, where are you, <HI>M. S.?</HI></P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> 5. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> is, That, as the Di&s;ciples in the Ship, feared Chri&s;t walking upon the Waters had been a foule Spirit, and would have &s;unk them: &s;o doth <HI>A.S.</HI> feare <HI>toleration,</HI> and it may prove the Di&s;&s;olver of <HI>Schi&s;me.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. This <HI>Simile</HI> &s;avoureth rather of good Wine, then of good Rea|&s;on. 2. And the things compared are as like one to another, as <HI>M. S.</HI> is to his <HI>A. S. &s;i&s;me,</HI> or an Apple to an Oy&s;ter. 3. This is but a <HI>may be;</HI> and, as he &s;aith, <HI>May</HI> comes but once a yeare; but this his <HI>may</HI> will never be.</P>
<P>He addeth, That <HI>that meanes, of all others, that hath God in it, is like&s;t to doe the deed.</HI> Is God then in this <HI>toleration</HI> of all &s;orts of mi&s;chiefe? What <HI>deed</HI> (I pray) is it like to doe, but to <HI>damne</HI> men eternally? The Lord pre&s;erve us from your <HI>meanes,</HI> if this be it, as from the Plague. 4. I pray you, good <HI>M.S.</HI> who told you, that the Apo&s;tles believed, that Chri&s;t was a foule Spirit, &s;ince the Text hath no &s;uch thing? The Greek word is <GAP DESC="foreign"> which &s;ignifieth any <HI>vaine vi&s;ion, appearance, &s;hadow, image,</HI> or <HI>fal&s;e repre&s;entation;</HI> &s;uch, as I am afraid, hath caried you off from the true, to &s;uch a roving Expo&s;ition of the word.</P>
<P>This <HI>M. S.</HI> afterwards will needs force a favour upon me, and (as he &s;aith) <HI>help my</HI> 10. <HI>Argument,</HI> by putting it in <HI>forme:</HI> but becau&s;e he puts but the <HI>forme,</HI> and leaveth out a part of the <HI>matter,</HI> I mu&s;t help him; which if he per|mit me not to doe, I &s;hall con him little thanks for &s;uch a Courte&s;ie.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> My 10. Argument then in <HI>form</HI> will be this:</P>
<P>If there were greater Differences among&s;t the members of the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> in the time of S. <HI>Paul;</HI> and yet they Communicated together, yea, he exhorted them unto mutuall Communion, and forbearance of Sects and Divi&s;ions: How much more &s;hould <HI>Presbyterians</HI> and <HI>Inde|pendents, viz.</HI> who have le&s;&s;e Difference among them, Communicate to|gether, and be exhorted to mutuall Communion, and forbearance of Sects and Divi&s;ions?</P>
<P>But &s;o it was, that there were greate<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"> Differences among&s;t the Members, &amp;c. <HI>Ergo,</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Seemeth to deny the Propo&s;ition, or the <HI>Connexum;</HI> and his Rea|&s;on is, or &s;hould be, according to his di&s;cour&s;e, not becau&s;e my <HI>Argument,</HI> as he &s;peaketh, but becau&s;e the <HI>Connexum</HI> (as he pretends) <HI>is built upon a fal&s;e foundation, viz. That the Rea&s;on why the Apologi&s;ts refu&s;e Communion with you,</HI> (You meane I &s;uppo&s;e in your <HI>Sacramentall</HI> Actions; adde, and in <HI>Government, &amp;c.</HI>) is becau&s;e of the degree of the differences in judgement between you and them; whereas the Rea&s;on of their refu&s;all in this kinde is the nature, or particularity of the difference, together with your practi&s;e de|pending upon your Opinion in oppo&s;ition unto theirs, not the height, weight, or importance of either.</P>
<PB N="151" REF="81">
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But I prove my <HI>connexum;</HI> for the ground of non-Communion to|gether, mu&s;t either be difference of Iudgement, or a breach of Charity; for the&s;e are the two onely wayes, whereby Chri&s;tians are united unto their Head, and are one with another; the one in the <HI>under&s;tanding,</HI> the other in the <HI>will;</HI> the two principall Faculties of the Soul, wherein con&s;i&s;ts the Image of God; &s;o that the le&s;&s;e difference there is of Iudgement in the <HI>under&s;tand|ing,</HI> or breach of Charity in the <HI>will,</HI> the le&s;&s;e <HI>rea&s;on</HI> is there for any Separati|on, non-Communion, or Schi&s;m: So your Suppo&s;ition is fal&s;e, <HI>viz.</HI> That I &s;uppo&s;e, that the ground of &s;uch a refu&s;all of Communion con&s;i&s;teth onely in difference of Iudgement; for I &s;uppo&s;e, that the ground of it may be a breach of Charity, and in particular per&s;ons a vicious life.</P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;hould have done well to declare us here in particular, what is the nature, or particularity of this difference, betwixt us, and them; for we cannot <HI>in practicis</HI> di&s;pute accurately, upon Generalities, &s;o ab&s;tract from all Particularity.</P>
<P>If it be replyed, That it is becau&s;e we admit vicious per&s;ons unto our Communion; I have an&s;wered it in my <HI>Annotations,</HI> whereunto he pretends to an&s;wer. He &s;hould have refuted my Rea&s;ons here; as al&s;o &s;undry others in Ma&s;ter <HI>Rutherfords</HI> Book, whereby he demon&s;trates how ridiculous and frivolous this pretext is: Neither is it needfull, that I &s;hould repeal them, to &s;well up a Book with them.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;econd An&s;wer: If there were &s;o many, and great <HI>differences among&s;t the Members of the Church of Corinth,</HI> as you &s;peak of, and yet <HI>Paul</HI> no wayes per&s;waded the Major part among&s;t them, to ca&s;t our, cut off, or &s;up|pre&s;&s;e, the <HI>&V;nderling Parties,</HI> but exhorted them to mutuall Communion; why do not ye the like?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> We ca&s;t you not out, nor off, but ye run away; we exhort you, but ye will not obey, ye &s;light, and contemn your Mother, that begot you; and when the Hou&s;e of God is to be Reformed, ye will have all things according to your fancy, or ye will be gone and renounce your Mother: O what &s;ort of Children and Dome&s;ticks of the Faith are ye?</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his third An&s;wer: He denyeth the <HI>A&s;&s;umption, viz.</HI> That there was greater difference among&s;t the Members of the Church of <HI>Corinth,</HI> then be|twixt the Independents, and our Churches.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I prove it; for both they differed in Articles of <HI>Faith,</HI> &s;ome of them denying the <HI>Re&s;urrection,</HI> the <HI>Doctrine</HI> of the <HI>Law,</HI> and <HI>Sacraments;</HI> &s;ome of them joyning the <HI>Law</HI> with the <HI>Go&s;pel,</HI> and <HI>Circumci&s;ion,</HI> with <HI>Bapti&s;m:</HI> And in Charity, &s;ome crying up &s;ome <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> and <HI>Pa&s;tors,</HI> and rejecting of others; others of the &s;ame Church, being of contrary mindes, and wills, without any Separation in Externall Communion, either in <HI>Sacraments</HI> or <HI>Government,</HI> for any thing we read in <HI>Scripture.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 11. Rea&s;on, in Sub&s;tance is this, That the Opinion of our Brethren
<PB N="152" REF="82">&s;ymbolizeth much, jumpeth in conceit, and that they &s;ympathize with the Donati&s;ts, who &s;eparated them&s;elves from other Churches, under pretext, That they were not &s;o holy as their own; neither is their Di&s;cipline unlike to that of the Convents, and Mona&s;teries among&s;t the Papi&s;ts, which profe&s;&s;e all one Doctrine, but are independent one upon another, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> An&s;wer 1. <HI>Symbolisa Theologia non e&s;t Argumentativa.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But this Argument is taken a <HI>Simili,</HI> and holds, <HI>quia &s;imilium eadem e&s;t ratio, viz. In eo, in quo &s;imilia &s;unt;</HI> Now they are blamed in &s;eparating them&s;elves from the re&s;t of tho&s;e, that profe&s;&s;e the &s;ame Doctrine, as if they were holier then the re&s;t: <HI>Ergo,</HI> &s;o are the Independents to be blamed for the &s;ame Rea&s;on.</P>
<P>His In&s;tances are childi&s;h and fond; for Angels and Devils agree not in that, which is blameable in Devils, for that agreement &s;hould be an impeach|ment, both to their Holine&s;&s;e, and Happine&s;&s;e.</P>
<P N="2">2. Neither agreeth <HI>A. S.</HI> with <HI>Ne&s;torius,</HI> in making way to any Here&s;ie of his own, as <HI>Ne&s;torius,</HI> wherein he was blameable.</P>
<P N="3">3. No more is it to the purpo&s;e, that ye are not like to Monks, for their Paunches, idlene&s;&s;e, or in their Buildings; howbeit, &s;ome of them be as lean, and as bu&s;ie, in their own way, as any <HI>of you</HI> Independents can be in yours: Neither is it a &s;in, to be fat. Onely I compare you with them, in that wherein we all blame them, <HI>viz.</HI> In &s;eparating them&s;elves from others, under pretext of greater holine&s;&s;e.</P>
<P>To his An&s;wer, to the third point: I reply, That I make not this compari|&s;on betwixt the Donati&s;ts, and the Apologi&s;ts, (as <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;ayeth here) but betwixt them, and all tho&s;e that are of the Independents opinion.</P>
<P>And &s;o to his fir&s;t An&s;wer, I reply, That however &s;ome of the Apologi&s;ts (of whom alone I &s;peak not) have not Churches, yet have they the &s;ame opi|nion, concerning the Separation of their Churches from others, that profe&s;&s;e the &s;ame Doctrine, and that under pretext, that they are holier then the re&s;t.</P>
<P>Secondly, <HI>M. S.</HI> an&s;wereth, That neither in &s;ub&s;tance, nor truth, doth it touch any of them, or their opinion. 1. For they do not &s;eparate from other Churches, but onely in &s;uch opinions and practi&s;es, wherein they cannot get leave of their Con&s;ciences to joyn with them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I have proved, that it touches them in truth; and as for his proof the Donati&s;ts did ju&s;t &s;o.</P>
<P>Whereas <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;aith, That they of the Presbytery differ in Opinions and practi&s;es one from another.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. It is true; but that is in things, that are not very materiall. 2. Or if they be materiall, they are particular Opinions of particular men, that are not known; not of whole Churches, nor approved by whole Churches. 3. And howbeit, &s;ome of them, though very few, differ in &s;ome practi&s;es, which are
<PB N="153" REF="82">not materiall; yet is it not &s;o much they, that make the&s;e differences; as that they are compelled by others to &s;uffer them, as they have declared them|&s;elves in their Letters &s;ent to the A&s;&s;embly. 4. That &s;mall difference breeds no Schi&s;m or Sects among them; but they entertain mutuall communion to|gether, both in Sacrament, and Government; and they admit one another unto their Synodall and Sacramentall Communion: &s;o do not Independent Churches among&s;t them&s;elves, nor with ours.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 2. Argument for this his A&s;&s;ertion is, becau&s;e <HI>A. S.</HI> him&s;elf and his Party, do &s;eparate them&s;elves from the Church of <HI>Rome,</HI> becau&s;e they think not that Church to be &s;o holy, as their own.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. We &s;eparate not our &s;elves from the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Church, becau&s;e of greater, or le&s;&s;e holine&s;&s;e in our Church, or in particular Per&s;ons, then in theirs; but becau&s;e we conceive that the <HI>Romi&s;h</HI> Church erreth in Fundamentalls. 2. Not onely committeth, but al&s;o, 3. Teaches Idolatry, and 4. compelleth men again&s;t their Con&s;cience, to commit, and profe&s;&s;e it: 5. Neither did we &s;epa|rate from the Papi&s;ts, but they &s;eparated from us, and did ca&s;t us out of their Church, and per&s;ecuted us to death; &s;o that neither, could we entertain Communion with them, without loo&s;ing both body and &s;oul. 6. Neither yet &s;eparate we from any Church, that holds the &s;ame <HI>Doctrine</HI> with us. 7. Neither beleeve we, that any Church holding the &s;ame <HI>Doctrine</HI> with us, can morally fall into Idolatry, or urge us to be Actors again&s;t our Con&s;ciences in any Ido|latrous Act; And this Liberty of Con&s;cience Independents may have in our Churches. 8. We pray you al&s;o to declare unto us, what Here&s;ie, Idolatry, or great vice, you &s;ee taught or approved of among&s;t us, that &s;hould com|pell you to quit our Churches, as we found among&s;t the Papi&s;ts, and then your Argument will have &s;ome force; otherwayes it hath none at all.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 3. Rea&s;on. If they do not think their Presbyteriall Churches <HI>more holy</HI> then the Congregationall, they are far more guilty of Schi&s;m then their Brethren, <HI>i. e.</HI> then Independents; For then they are at liberty in point of Con&s;cience, to come over and joyn with them, whereas the other are in bands and fetters of Con&s;cience, and can pa&s;&s;e unto them. Their Brethren would come to them, but cannot; they can come over unto the&s;e, but will not. It is the Will, and not the Act, that maketh Schi&s;m and Separation.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. But if they think not their Presbyteriall Churches more holy, all your Argument is ridiculous. 2. And I mu&s;t confe&s;&s;e, that <HI>M. S.</HI> with his Faction are very &s;light, who can make very few Arguments, that have any appearance of rea&s;on, unle&s;&s;e they be grounded upon their pretended holi|ne&s;&s;e; and that this be &s;uppo&s;ed as a Principle of Independent Divinity: What <HI>Seneca</HI> &s;aith of <HI>Pre&s;umptuous Scholars, Multi ad &s;apientiam perveni&s;|&s;ent ni&s;i &s;e jam jam perveni&s;&s;e puta&s;&s;ent,</HI> may be more ju&s;tly &s;aid of your ridiculous Sect, changing onely <HI>&s;apientiam, in veram pietatem aut vitae &s;an|<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="3 letters">iatem.</HI> 3. Howbeit, ye were holier then we, yet could we not come unto
<PB N="154" REF="83">you; and that not &s;o much becau&s;e ye are not holy, as becau&s;e we finde in your Opinions a great folly, yea, by con&s;equence more Impiety and Here&s;ie, then in &s;undry Hereticall Churches, as we, and many others al&s;o have el&s;e|where &s;hewed: 4. But can you think, that to plea&s;ure every Melancholious brain, that differs not from us in Doctrine, (if he be le&s;&s;e vicious then others, howbeit no wayes more vertuous) but onely in opinion concerning Di&s;cipline; in ca&s;e, that under pretext of Con&s;cience, he will not &s;ubmit unto our Churches, that pre&s;ently all our Churches mu&s;t &s;ubmit unto him? Or were it not better that he, and all his, &s;hould be &s;ent into <HI>America,</HI> a while, till their brains may be brought to better temper. We cannot be &s;o fooli&s;h, as to come unto &s;o incon&s;iderable a Party; who&s;e opinions too, are yet unknown: And of tho&s;e, that are known, &s;ome more dangerous, then many Here&s;ies. 5. What &s;hould we have to do with men, who plead on this manner for impunity for all &s;in and Here&s;ie; &s;hould we admit into our Churches an Anarchy; and give power to ignorant Fellows, to Preach, and make Mini&s;ters; &s;hall we grant unto women the &s;hingling, or gingling of the Keyes of the Church, to &s;erve my &s;elf with the trim, and fine termes of Independent Divinity? 6. It is a &s;illy affected di&s;tinction of <HI>M. S.</HI> to &s;ay, that it is the Will, and not the Act, that maketh a Schi&s;m: It is both; for Schi&s;m is an Act of the Will, or a voluntary Act; It mu&s;t be <HI>Actus Voluntatis elicitus, aut imperatus.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> 4. <HI>An&s;wer,</HI> That he &s;eeth not wherein the Apologi&s;ts &s;ymbolize with Convents, <HI>&amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I have &s;hewn it, 1. In their Separation from others, under pretext of greater Holine&s;&s;e, then other men have. 2. And becau&s;e every Order is In|dependent one of another, ju&s;t as your Congregationall Churches, the Members whereof have no more Communion with Churches among&s;t us, or among&s;t them&s;elves, then the Monks of one Convent, with tho&s;e of another Convent.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 5. You couple your &s;elf with the&s;e Popi&s;h Convents, implying that your Presbyterians have their Soveraign Judicatory, as they.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> We have no &s;upreme Iudicatory, but that of the living God: If we have Superiour, and Inferiour Iudicatories, and the Papi&s;ts al&s;o; neither we, nor they, preci&s;ely are to be blamed in that; but &s;o far forth, as they have the Pope, one man, for &s;upreme Iudge, and Head of the Church, which is proper to Chri&s;t; In that they prove, that he is the Antichri&s;t. And as it is great pride, in them, to make him with his Con&s;i&s;tory &s;upreme Iudge over the Univer&s;all Church: So is it a peece of extraordinary pride, and &s;elf-wit in your Churches, that ye con&s;titute &s;ometimes &s;even or eight &s;imple Fellows, how Hereticall &s;oever be their Doctrine, and how abominable &s;oever their life, &s;upreme Iudges, Gods immediate Lievtenants, and Independent of all the Iudgements of all the Churches of the World, how Orthodox &s;oever be their Opinions, and how pious and holy &s;oever be their Practi&s;es. But again&s;t
<PB N="155" REF="83">&s;uch a Subordination of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Iudicatories, as we have according to Gods Word, no man can take ju&s;t Exception.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> &s;aith, That he hath an&s;wered my twelfth Rea&s;on; and I have &s;hew|ed, how Ab&s;urdly he hath an&s;wered.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 13. Argument. <HI>M. S.</HI> with his Logico Divinity, by a Doctorall pri|viledge, under pretext to reform my Argument, deformeth and disfigureth it altogether by his Additions, and Confu&s;ions, in making it Hypotheticall, whereas it is meerly Categoricall: If he had de&s;ired to put it in Form, he needed not, but to have added, or expre&s;&s;ed the Propo&s;ition, which was onely &s;uppre&s;&s;ed in this manner.</P>
<P>They who have but one God, one Chri&s;t, one Lord, and one Spirit, who are one Body, who have one Faith, and one Bapti&s;m, whereby they enter in|to the Church, &s;hould have one Communion, whereby to be Spiritually fed, and one Di&s;cipline to be ruled by.</P>
<P>But we all, <HI>i. e.</HI> Presbyterians (as ye call us) and Independents, we have but one God, one Chri&s;t, one Lord, and one Spirit, <HI>&amp;c. Ergo,</HI></P>
<P>We all, <HI>i. e.</HI> Presbyterians, and Independents, &s;hould have but one Spiri|tuall Communion, whereby to be Spiritually fed, and one Di&s;cipline to be ruled by.</P>
<P>And from this, he inferreth very well. <HI>Ergo,</HI> The Independents are not to be <HI>tolerated, viz.</HI> In their Schi&s;m, Separation, or non-Communion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> grants all the Argument, and afterward di&s;tingui&s;hes the Con|clu&s;ion, which is an odde manner of an&s;wering of Arguments, and proper to his Sect: But we mu&s;t take of ill pay-ma&s;ters, what we may. He &s;aith then 1. My Conclu&s;ions do not follow from my Premi&s;es.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But the Argument is in Form: If it follow not, &s;hew me, what fault there is in the Form of it.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 2. jeereth the termes of my Argument in calling them, one, one, and one, and my multiplied unity, and &s;o jeereth the Holy Gho&s;t him&s;elf, from whom I have borrowed them, <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. and 8. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.5. I might have added more unities; as that we &s;hould with one mouth glorifie God, <HI>Rom.</HI> 5.6. we are one Bread, 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.17. we drink in one Spirit, <HI>ver&s;.</HI> 13. we are all one in Chri&s;t, <HI>Gal.</HI> 3.28. one Law-giver and Iudge, <HI>Jam.</HI> 4.12. Chri&s;t prayeth, that we may be all one anomg&s;t our &s;elves, and one in the Father, and the Son, <HI>John</HI> 17.22, 23.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his fir&s;t Solution then is, That we ought all to have one Communion and Di&s;cipline, but not that, that is of Cla&s;&s;ique In&s;piration, no more then that of Papall, or Epi&s;copall Recommendation.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. At lea&s;t of this, <HI>viz. We &s;hould have one Communion and Di&s;cipline;</HI> it follows, That there &s;hould be no Schi&s;m or Toleration granted, that may make a Schi&s;m in the body, and di&s;&s;olve our Communion. 2. If you cannot &s;hew any materiall difference in <HI>Doctrine,</HI> and other things, (yea, ye confe&s;&s;e
<PB N="156" REF="84">your &s;elves, that it is not great) ye cannot &s;eparate your &s;elves from us in Sa|cramentall Communion and Di&s;cipline. 3. Neither hitherto have ye &s;hewn any practi&s;e in Sacramentall Communion, wherein ye differ from us; for we have no Idolatry among us, and men openly vicious, are not admitted to the Lords Table among us: Neither can any particular man ab&s;tain from Sacramentall Communion in a Church, upon pretext that this or that man is vicious; for it belongeth not to him, but to the Rulers of the Church to judge of particu|lar mens lives, whether they be in a State to Communicate, or not: No more appertains it to one particular Church, to judge of the Members of another particular Church: Wherefore, that not being their Act, it cannot be im|puted to them; and con&s;equently, they have no Rea&s;on in &s;uch a Ca&s;e, to be &s;o &s;crupulous.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;econd An&s;wer is, Howbeit they be bound to one Communion and Di&s;cipline; yet would they be led to it, by light, and not by fear.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. There is light enough &s;hewn you, if ye wil! open your eyes to &s;ee it. And we de&s;ire you not to joyn in this Unity, out of any fear of men, but of God. 2. Howbeit, you cannot &s;ee the Light, yet no Approbation, Con&s;ent, or Po&s;itive Permi&s;&s;ion, or Toleration, &s;hould be granted you to live in Darkne&s;&s;e, much le&s;&s;e to erect Schools and Synagogues of Darkne&s;&s;e. 3. The Parliament, and all good men, I am confident, will <HI>tolerate</HI> you in your Darkne&s;&s;e, till <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t</HI> enlighten you, if ye can be content to live in qua|lity of private men, and not erect Churches and Schools, to blinde others: Neither can they grant you any thing more; for how&s;oever, they cannot com|pell your Con&s;ciences, yet ma&s;t they hinder you, to undo other mens Con&s;ci|ences in &s;owing of your Tares, and wilde Oats.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 3. An&s;wer: That duty which lieth upon all <HI>Chri&s;tians,</HI> to have but <HI>one Communion and Di&s;cipline among them,</HI> is no Di&s;pen&s;ation unto any Party or number of them, to &s;mite their Brethren with the fi&s;t of uncharitable|ne&s;&s;e, or to di&s;mount them from their Mini&s;teriall &s;tandings in the <HI>Church,</HI> becau&s;e they will not, or rather cannot, knit and joyn in the &s;ame <HI>Communion</HI> and <HI>Di&s;cipline</HI> with them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. You are very ingrate, unthankfull unto the Parliament, and your Brethren of the <HI>A&s;&s;embly:</HI> Ye have experimented no uncharitablene&s;&s;e from any of them: Hitherto they have dealt with you in all meekne&s;&s;e, and brotherly affection. 2. None of you have been put out of your Mini&s;tery, for your Opinions; howbeit, many of you have merited it, for your in&s;o|lency, and malepertne&s;&s;e, in erecting of new <HI>Churches</HI> and <HI>Sects,</HI> again&s;t your own <HI>Tenets;</HI> for ye maintain, that a <HI>Church</HI> cannot be erected without the Magi&s;trates Con&s;ent, and the Right hand of A&s;&s;ociation of <HI>Neighbour Churches,</HI> which ye have not had in your <HI>Churches,</HI> here in <HI>Old England.</HI> 3. But where|fore may not Sectaries be di&s;mounted, who mount &s;o high at their own hand. 4. If ye will not joyn with the re&s;t the <HI>Churches</HI> of this Kingdom, and
<PB N="157" REF="84">&s;ubmit to the <HI>Parliament,</HI> and the <HI>Church of God</HI> here; but be <HI>Eus per &s;e, Ens independens,</HI> and have particular Priviledges beyond the re&s;t of the Subjects; ye may be gone, and &s;tay there from whence ye came; ye may goe to <HI>New-England,</HI> and mount as high as plea&s;eth you, there; Only trouble not the Church and Kingdome here, and the Church and Kingdome will not trouble you there. 4. The <HI>Church</HI> here doth you no wrong; only &s;he mainteineth, that your Tenets are contrary to Gods Word: and confe&s;&s;eth, That if the <HI>Parliament</HI> will tolerate you, it may; but that, in &s;o doing, their Iudgement is (&s;ince they are commanded to give it) that it is flatly again&s;t Gods Word. And I may &s;ay, &s;uch a thing might breed ill blood, of Friends make Enemies, and peradventure undoe the State: and who knoweth, if it &s;hould plea&s;e God in his mercy to end this War, but it might make a Sacrifice of all &s;uch as &s;hould have hand in it: All Chri&s;tians are bound in Con&s;cience to oppo&s;e &s;uch Licentiou&s;|ne&s;&s;e and Libertini&s;me in Religion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his 4. <HI>An&s;wer</HI> is, that tho&s;e of his Sect are kept under Hatches and oppre&s;&s;ed.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Unto this we have an&s;wered, and in this they do as Children that weepe, before they be whipt.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 14. If vi&s;ible <HI>Churches</HI> have <HI>Di&s;ciplines</HI> or <HI>Government,</HI> different in their Species, then the <HI>Churches</HI> mu&s;t be different in their Species al&s;o. But the con&s;equent is fal&s;e. <HI>Ergo,</HI> So is the Antecedent; <HI>So Churches</HI> have not different Di&s;ciplines and <HI>Governments.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Connexion</HI> in my <HI>Argument</HI> is proved, becau&s;e all <HI>collective Bodies,</HI> that are governed, are differenced in their Species by their &s;pecificall <HI>Governments,</HI> as we &s;ee in Civill <HI>Government,</HI> in the <HI>Con&s;titution</HI> of <HI>States, Kingdoms,</HI> and <HI>Republicks.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>A&s;&s;umption</HI> is proved, becau&s;e the <HI>vi&s;ible Church</HI> is but one <HI>Church</HI> in its Species.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> jeeres, jea&s;ts, and flouts this <HI>Argument:</HI> he makes as though he helpt it; but it is &s;trong enough without his help, the matter being &s;ound e|nough, and the Syllogi&s;me in forme.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> His fir&s;t <HI>An&s;wer</HI> is, that from hence cannot be gathered, that the Apologi&s;me is not <HI>tolerable.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This is not the <HI>Conclu&s;ion,</HI> that I have to prove; for I never reade in Scripture, or el&s;e where, of any <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Di&s;cipline,</HI> or <HI>Government,</HI> named <HI>Apologi&s;me:</HI> Away then with your new coyned tearmes of <HI>Apolo|gi&s;me,</HI> and <HI>Quinque Eccle&s;ian Mini&s;ters, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P>The <HI>Conclu&s;ion,</HI> that I have to prove, is this; <HI>Presbyterians,</HI> and your <HI>Inde|pendent Churches</HI> have not, according to Gods word, or &s;hould not have dif|ferent <HI>Di&s;ciplines,</HI> which any <HI>Neophyt</HI> in <HI>Logick</HI> can ea&s;ily deduce by the power of <HI>Syllogi&s;mes:</HI> For it is known in <HI>Logick,</HI> that a <HI>Syllogi&s;me,</HI> that can inferre an <HI>univer&s;all Conclu&s;ion,</HI> may inferre all the particulars of that <HI>univer&s;all
<PB N="158" REF="85">Conclu&s;ion,</HI> as when I conclude, that all men have rea&s;onable &s;oules, I conclude that <HI>Peter, Paul,</HI> and <HI>John,</HI> have rea&s;onable &s;oules; &s;o then when I conclude here <HI>univer&s;ally,</HI> that no <HI>Church</HI> hath or &s;hould have different <HI>Di&s;ciplines, Ergo, Presbyterians, Independents,</HI> and other <HI>Churches,</HI> &s;hould not have different <HI>Di&s;ciplines</HI> or <HI>Government;</HI> I conclude, there mu&s;t be but one <HI>Church,</HI> and one <HI>Government,</HI> what ever it be.</P>
<P>If the <HI>Lord</HI> be <HI>God,</HI> then follow him; But if <HI>Baal,</HI> then follow him: So if <HI>Presbyterian Di&s;cipline</HI> or <HI>Government</HI> be <HI>Gods,</HI> follow it; if <HI>Independents Di&s;cipline</HI> be <HI>Gods,</HI> follow it, and no other: Let not the Child be devided in two, as the fal&s;e Mother, that had &s;tolen the Child, would have had it, but let it live, as the true Mother de&s;ired.</P>
<P>No more <HI>Pluralities</HI> (I pray) of <HI>Di&s;ciplines,</HI> then of <HI>Benefices;</HI> Let no man bargain about <HI>Government;</HI> Let <HI>Gods Ordinance</HI> hold, what ever it be; and whereever <HI>Independent Government</HI> be, whether in <HI>Aries, Taurus, Cancer,</HI> or <HI>Capricorne,</HI> ye may goe there, and enjoy it peaceably: We only &s;peak of the Di&s;cipline of Chri&s;ts Church in <HI>England,</HI> what it &s;hould be.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> It followeth not from hence, that therefore that Government, which is more generally e&s;tabli&s;hed and practi&s;ed in the World, &s;hould be that &s;pe|cificall Government, whereby it ought to be governed.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Neither intended I to inferre or conclude any &s;uch thing: Only I &s;ay, that whatever the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> conclude, or the <HI>Parliament</HI> e&s;tabli&s;h in the State, yet, according to Gods Word, Pluralitie of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Di&s;ciplines or Governments can no wayes be concluded or e&s;tabli&s;hed; and con&s;e|quently, ye goe again&s;t Gods Word, in pleading for it: And therefore all is lo&s;t that you build thereupon. I cannot better an&s;wer your comparing of me with <HI>Herod,</HI> then to &s;light it, with the re&s;t of the overflowings of your Call. One good Argument would help your Cau&s;e, more then a hundred In|juries: Is this the Independent Power of Pietie you talk &s;o much of?</P>
<P>Unto <HI>M. S.</HI> his 2. An&s;wer; I grant him, That before he and his Col|leagues be &s;ufficiently informed of the lawfulne&s;&s;e of any Government, that in Gods mercy, &s;hall be e&s;tabli&s;hed, they are not bound to obey, much le&s;&s;e ought they to be &s;courged, as he &s;peaketh. But when they are &s;ufficiently in|formed of the lawfulne&s;&s;e of it, (I meane <HI>&s;ufficienti&acirc; morali,</HI> which is all that Men can furni&s;h them; but not <HI>Phy&s;ic&acirc;,</HI> which is only in Gods hands) they mu&s;t obey, and no wayes plead, with all Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, <HI>non-Conviction,</HI> and pretended <HI>Con&s;cience,</HI> and <HI>Toleration,</HI> and want of Autho|rity in the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> to puni&s;h them: They mu&s;t obey, as well as the fal&s;e Prophets, and Schi&s;maticks of the Old Te&s;tament.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> 3. <HI>An&s;w.</HI> The &s;ervants of Chri&s;t &s;hould not fall foule for uniformitie in <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> and the greater eat up the le&s;&s;e: God hath provided other meanes.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> If divers <HI>Di&s;ciplines</HI> be e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law, the good Mini&s;ters mu&s;t
<PB N="159" REF="85">tolerate that, which they cannot mend; and &s;erve them&s;elves of all the means they can, according to Gods Word, to reduce their Brethren to the right way: But if they be not yet e&s;tabli&s;hed, none, but one, &s;hould be approved by the &s;ervants of God; and the Civill Magi&s;trate, in imitation of <HI>Mo&s;es,</HI> or rather of God, is bound in duty, only to admit one, and that the mo&s;t conform to Scripture; unle&s;&s;e he will bring in Factions and Schi&s;mes both into Church and Commonwealth: and that principally, when any of them may be dan|gerous for both, as <HI>Independencie,</HI> which may prove more dangerous then &s;even Here&s;ies.</P>
<P>But in all this, M.S. an&s;wereth not my Argument formally, but mo&s;t ridicu|lou&s;ly grants the Premi&s;&s;es, and denieth the Conclu&s;ion.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 15. Neither Chri&s;t, nor his Apo&s;tles, ever granted any <HI>Toleration</HI> to divers Sects and Governments in the Church; Wherefore then will ye be Suiters for that, which they never granted?</P>
<P>M. S. here neither denieth the Antecedent, nor the Con&s;equence of this my Argument; but &s;ingeth his old &s;ong, That neither <HI>Chri&s;t, nor his Apo&s;tles, did ever grant a power to a major part of Profo&s;&s;ours in a Kingdom or Nation, to grind the faces of their Brethren,</HI> either becau&s;e they could not conform their Judge|ments with them, or becau&s;e they kept a good Con&s;cience.</P>
<P>A. S. 1. We grant you all that. 2. Neither are your <HI>faces grinded.</HI> 3. Much le&s;&s;e <HI>grinded</HI> for non-conformitie of your Judgements with theirs, or keeping of a good Con&s;cience. 4. Your Con&s;cience is very ill, that will not be infor|med of the Truth. 5. We have told you, that Anabapti&s;ts, Separati&s;ts, and o|thers, like unto you, pretend the &s;ame thing. 6. Ye furni&s;h us here an Argu|ment again&s;t <HI>New-England</HI> men, in their proceedings with Godly Mini&s;ters here. 7. Live quietly, and trouble not the Church, nor the State, and ye may live here a peaceable life, without any trouble to your Con&s;ciences. 8. But it is a foolery in you, to think, that your <HI>faces are grinded;</HI> becau&s;e your Brethren will not con&s;ent, that ye erect a Sect, &amp; have Pulpits allowed you to beat down the Truth: They are bound in Con&s;cience to re&s;i&s;t you, as ye take your &s;elves bound to re&s;i&s;t them. 9. If you think your <HI>faces grinded</HI> here, you may be gone, and live in contentment there, from whence ye came. 10. And yet, howbeit your Brethren of the Mini&s;teris take not upon them&s;elves any thing, but to re&s;i&s;t you with the Arms of the Spirit; yet mu&s;t you thinke, that the Ci|vill Magi&s;trate hath no le&s;&s;e power over you here, then your Civill Magi&s;trate hath over Sectaries in <HI>New-England.</HI> 11. But it were better for you, Bre|thren, to take a re&s;olution to live with us in unitie, under &s;uch a Di&s;cipline, as may be concluded and &s;etled in the feare of God. But cannot you live in this World, unle&s;&s;e you give a Law to all the World? What you &s;ay of <HI>Presbyteri|ans,</HI> in a&s;&s;uming of &s;omething imperious, &amp;c. is but a Calumny.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> 2. an&s;wers my Argument with a Que&s;tion, <HI>Whence we have a Tole|ration of our Presbyterian Di&s;cipline?</HI></P>
<PB N="160" REF="86">
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. It is a Maxime in Philo&s;ophie, that <HI>Que&s;tio que&s;tionem non &s;olvit,</HI> one Que&s;tion &s;olves not another. 2. I an&s;wer, That we have its in&s;titution from God, in his Word, as we have already demon&s;trated it: and He, in in|&s;tituting of it, hath ordained, that it be not only tolerated, but al&s;o received and preached through all the World, as I have already proved. 3. In <HI>France</HI> it was brought in by Chri&s;ts Mini&s;ters, e&s;tabli&s;hed by a Prote&s;tant King, and &s;ome others before him, who had &s;ome ta&s;te of the Go&s;pel. 4. It hath been there e&s;tabli&s;hed by the Law of the Kingdome, and the Prote&s;tant Armies, which God ble&s;&s;ed under a Prote&s;tant King, again&s;t the Pope, the Papi&s;ts and Je&s;uites, who would have pulled the Crown off his head, to &s;et it upon <HI>Don Philips;</HI> that &s;o fighting for his Crown, he might al&s;o fight for that of Chri&s;t Ie&s;us, and e&s;tabli&s;h it gloriou&s;ly in his Kingdome. And all this may be ea&s;ily con|firmed by the <HI>French Hi&s;tory,</HI> and &s;undry Edicts in favour of Prote&s;tants. It is an untruth, that ever it was tolerated by the Romi&s;h Church; for they imployed all their endeavours to oppre&s;&s;e it, yea again&s;t all Law: They are bound to their King, who is al&s;o bound to them, for fighting for his Cau&s;e. In <HI>England</HI> it is e&s;tabli&s;hed (as I have &s;undry times told you) in the <HI>French, Dutch, Italian,</HI> and <HI>Spani&s;h Churches,</HI> by the <HI>Kings</HI> and <HI>Par|liaments</HI> Authority. And how it hath been e&s;tabli&s;hed in <HI>Scotland,</HI> it is better known, then I can declare it, <HI>viz.</HI> by Civill and Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Au|thority.</P>
<P>M. S. his 3. An&s;wer or Objection again&s;t my <HI>Rea&s;on,</HI> commeth to this; That by the &s;ame Rea&s;on, Papi&s;ts will not tolerate Prote&s;tants, whom they hold for Schi&s;maticks.</P>
<P>A.S. 1. This is only &s;aid, but not proved. 2. They neither tolerate Here|ticks, nor Schi&s;maticks, when they can hinder them. 3. The Papi&s;ts hold not us &s;imply for Schi&s;maticks, but al&s;o for Hereticks. 4. And con&s;equently, if your Argument hold, That we mu&s;t tolerate what&s;oever they tolerate; &s;ince they tolerate us in quality of Hereticks, in their judgement, we mu&s;t al&s;o tolerate Hereticks, yea Iewes al&s;o, and permit them Synagogues, as they doe; yea, we mu&s;t tolerate an hundred Religions, as the States of <HI>Poland</HI> doe. 5. The que&s;tion is not, what Papi&s;ts will, but what both we, and they &s;hould doe; or rather what Gods Word commands us to doe: We take not Antichri&s;t, but Chri&s;t and his Word for a patterne of our duty.</P>
<P>M.S. his 4. An&s;w. Whereas you &s;ay, that they granted not a <HI>Toleration</HI> to divers Sects, doe you not imply, that they did grant a <HI>Toleration</HI> to &s;ome one Sect, at lea&s;t: And how know you, whether the <HI>Apologi&s;me</HI> be not that Sect?</P>
<P>A.S. Truly M.S. is very &s;ubtile, who of a Negative infers an Affirmative; even as if I &s;hould conclude thus: M. S. is not divers Schi&s;maticks or Here|ticks; <HI>Ergo,</HI> He is one Heretick: This man hath not committed divers Adul|teries;
<PB N="161" REF="86"><HI>Ergo,</HI> He hath committed one Adultery. Have you never learned, good M.S. that old Rhime, wherein there is more Rea&s;on then Poetrie:
<Q><L>Syllogi&s;ari, non e&s;t ex Particulari;</L>
<L>Neve Negativis, rect&egrave; concludere &s;i vis:</L></Q></P>
<P>&s;ince it follows not. I know not at all, that Chri&s;t or his Apo&s;tles ever granted a <HI>Toleration</HI> to the Sect of <HI>Apologi&s;me,</HI> as you &s;tile it. 3. And &s;ince you ap|peale to my Con&s;cience in this Point, you mu&s;t &s;ubmit to my Iudgement; o|therwi&s;e you profane the Name of God.</P>
<P>M. S. 5. An&s;wer is, That <HI>Toleration</HI> is <HI>rei malae;</HI> and therefore the <HI>Apolo|gi&s;ts</HI> &s;hould not be Suiters for a <HI>Toleration,</HI> but &s;hould be encouraged.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. M.S.</HI> is minded to be merry, but I mu&s;t be &s;erious; and therefore 1. I deny your Antecedent, and I gave you the Rea&s;on heretofore. 2. <HI>Apolo|gi&s;me,</HI> I have told you, is <HI>res pe&s;&s;ima,</HI> and more dangerous by con&s;equence, then 10. Here&s;ies, as I have &s;ufficiently proved to all men who will &s;it down with Rea&s;on.</P>
<P>Then he addeth, That if they &s;in in &s;uing for a <HI>Toleration; Ergo,</HI> To pre|vent that &s;in, it &s;hould be granted them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> By the &s;ame rea&s;on, if a man &s;in in &s;uing for a <HI>toleration</HI> of <HI>Mahume|tani&s;me</HI> or <HI>Adultery;</HI> to the end to prevent &s;uch &s;ins, they &s;hould be <HI>tolerated.</HI> This Argument of <HI>M.S.</HI> is as ridiculous, as impious.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> But &s;ixthly and la&s;tly, What doe you think of <HI>Sinite utrumque cre&s;cere; Let both grow together untill the Harve&s;t,</HI> Math. 13.30.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> Since you are &s;o de&s;irous of my judgement, I &s;hall willingly give it you. 1. I an&s;wer by your own Maxime, that <HI>Symbolica Theologia non e&s;t argu|mentativa;</HI> Symbolicall or Parabolicall Theologie furni&s;heth no good Ar|gument. Now this is a <HI>Parable;</HI> for the Text &s;aith, v. 3. <HI>And he &s;pake many things to them in Parables<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"></HI> 2. I beleeve, that by both, <HI>viz.</HI> the <HI>Wheat</HI> and the <HI>Tares,</HI> our Saviour meaneth not Hereticks, but all the Good, or the Faithfull, and the Wicked; &s;o that, if out of this you will conclude a <HI>Toleration,</HI> ye mu&s;t conclude a <HI>Toleration</HI> for Adulterers, Murtherers, Parricides, <HI>Ravilliacks,</HI> and Gunpowder Traitors, <HI>Chatells,</HI> Regi-cides. 3. If by a Toleration, ye mean a po&s;itive Toleration or Con&s;ent, &s;uch as ye de&s;ire; then we mu&s;t all po&s;itively tolerate, or con&s;ent, to have men of &s;uch ill qualities and ill conditions, to live among&s;t us with all impunity, yea, and approbation. 4. I beleeve, that Chri&s;t &s;peaketh there to the Apo&s;tles, and will not that they u&s;urpe the Civill Magi|&s;trates power, in puni&s;hing of them that are of his cognizince, yea, though he will not doe it. And &s;o doe our learned and godly Mini&s;ters; they doe their duty with the &s;word of the Spirit, and leave the Materiall &s;word unto the Civill Magi&s;trate, as proper unto him, as the Spirituall is unto them, for <HI>He caries not the &s;word in vain.</HI> Neither mu&s;t they meddle with the Materiall, nor he with the Spirituall &s;word. 5. If they mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated,</HI> according to Gods Word, how have you taken the <HI>Covenant,</HI> and &s;o &s;olemnly &s;worne, and &s;ub|&s;cribed
<PB N="162" REF="87">with your hands, the extirpation of Papi&s;ts and of all the <HI>Hierarchy?</HI> 6. <HI>Servet</HI> (who called the <HI>Trinity</HI> a three-headed <HI>Cat,</HI> and denyed the <HI>Incar|nation</HI> of the Son of God, and his Mediator-&s;hip) and his Followers brought this very Argument for him and his Sect, that you now do. So here ye bring no new thing, but what &s;undry <HI>Hereticks</HI> brought before you; &s;o yee tread directly in their &s;teps, and have made choice of a prety pattern.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 16. Argument is taken from the practi&s;e of the Independents of <HI>New England; who&s;e wayes and practi&s;es</HI> (&s;ay they) <HI>are improved to a better edition, and greater refinement,</HI> whom al&s;o they compare in their Apology with Father <HI>Abraham,</HI> and being put in form, will be this.</P>
<P>That courte&s;ie, which no man can obtain of the Independents, where they have authority, <HI>viz.</HI> in <HI>New England;</HI> That courte&s;ie &s;hould they not be &s;uiters for here in <HI>Old England.</HI></P>
<P>But a Toleration of a New <HI>Religion,</HI> or <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> of <HI>Sects</HI> and <HI>Here&s;ies,</HI> is a courte&s;ie, that no man can obtain of the Independents, where they have authority, <HI>viz.</HI> in <HI>New England. Ergo,</HI> Toleration is a courte&s;ie, that they <HI>i. e.</HI> Independents &s;hould not be &s;uiters for here in <HI>Old England.</HI></P>
<P>The Major Propo&s;ition may be confirmed; for it is <HI>&agrave; pari;</HI> and &s;uch mea&s;ure as they mea&s;ure with, &s;uch &s;hould be mea&s;ured unto them again, for the <HI>Lex Talionis</HI> requireth it: And what rea&s;on is it, that men &s;hould be <HI>tolerated</HI> by us in their erroneous Tenets, who will not <HI>tolerate</HI> the truth? What if they &s;hould increa&s;e here? What more favour could we hope for from them, then our dear Brethren have ta&s;ted already in the &s;orrowfull times of their Affli|ctions? Without doubt, being great Politicians, and Undertakers, zealous in the Noviciate and Infaney of their <HI>Sect,</HI> and no le&s;&s;e cunning, and politique, then the Ie&s;uites them&s;elves, the Church of God, and the State al&s;o &s;hould &s;eriou&s;ly lay to heart, what they may do here likewi&s;e; And their activity in making of Pro&s;elytes, both in the Army, and the City, &s;hould give all men &s;ubject enough to be diffident of them.</P>
<P>The Minor appeareth cleerly, by the proceedings of <HI>New England,</HI> and the <HI>Sectaries</HI> bred in the <HI>Independent Sect,</HI> whereof &s;ome women have been the Ring-leaders, as one Mi&s;tre&s;&s;e <HI>Hutchin&s;on,</HI> and &s;undry others, whom they would no wayes <HI>tolerate</HI> among&s;t them, but puni&s;hed by Impri&s;onment, and Ex|iling of their per&s;ons, how&s;oever they went out of <HI>Old England</HI> with them and were Companions of the &s;ame mi&s;ery, pretended Per&s;ecution and Under|taking.</P>
<P>No better dealt they with &s;ome <HI>Presbyterians</HI> of <HI>Old England,</HI> who being grievou&s;ly per&s;ecuted here for <HI>Non-Conformity;</HI> yet would they not &s;o much a<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"> <HI>tolerate</HI> them in any corner of the Country; yea not &s;o much as in that, which was next to the <HI>Barbarians,</HI> where they could not, but con&s;equently be expo&s;ed to the greate&s;t danger; &s;uch were their mercies and bowels of com|pa&s;&s;ion towards their poore, and afflicted <HI>Brethren,</HI> whom yet they acknow|ledged
<PB N="163" REF="87">to be of very &s;ound Doctrine, and holine&s;&s;e of life.</P>
<P>As for this Argument, <HI>M. S.</HI> becau&s;e he cannot an&s;wer the Minor, he &s;ends me to <HI>New England</HI> to &s;eeke the Solution.</P>
<P>But I purpo&s;e not to undertake &s;uch a voyage for <HI>Independent Sophi&s;ticati|ons,</HI> &s;ince the Argument convicts my under&s;tanding.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 2. <HI>An&s;wereth,</HI> That he would fain know, what I meane to do with this Story.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Since he pretends &s;o great dulne&s;&s;e, I have put the <HI>Argument</HI> in Forme for him, and &s;hewed him, how I &s;erve my &s;elfe of it, to confirme my Minor by.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> proveth, that this Story cannot &s;erve me, for, &s;aith he, <HI>i. e. A. S. doth not approve of tho&s;e proceedings, viz.</HI> of the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>N. E.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> It is all one, for I argue onely <HI>ex Conce&s;&s;is,</HI> which maketh it an <HI>Argu|ment ad hominem,</HI> and &s;heweth how that in &s;o doing, and by &s;uch Suing for a <HI>Toleration</HI> here, yee &s;tand not to your own principles, but change them with the <HI>Climate;</HI> whereof I &s;ay, what a very grave <HI>Pre&s;ident</HI> of the <HI>Court</HI> of <HI>Parliament</HI> of <HI>Paris</HI> &s;aid to the Ie&s;uits, upon the like ca&s;e: The Lord keepe me from men that have one faith on the one, and another on the other &s;ide of the <HI>Alpes:</HI> So I to you, God keepe me from Men, who maintaine &s;ome Principles in <HI>America,</HI> or <HI>New England,</HI> and the contrary in <HI>Europe</HI> or in <HI>Old England.</HI> I pray you, holy Fathers, drinke together and agree, be|fore ye come to put us here in combu&s;tion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Is the man &s;o full of the &s;pirit of Reprehen&s;ion, again&s;t &s;uch practi&s;es? and yet &s;o full of the &s;pirit of imitation? <HI>i. e.</HI> If <HI>A. S.</HI> reprove &s;uch practi&s;es; he &s;hould not imitate them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I have an&s;wered, 1. That my Argument proves not, what I &s;hould do; but what yee &s;hould not do: It is <HI>Argumentum ad hominem:</HI> 2. I An&s;wer again, that we per&s;ecute not <HI>Independents,</HI> as you &s;ay; but hinder them, to &s;ow their Tares; They have never been, nor are they, nor are they ever like to be per&s;ecuted by the <HI>Parliament,</HI> as I hope: I hope the <HI>Indepen|dents</HI> will have more Con&s;cience, then to give ju&s;t occa&s;ion unto the <HI>Parlia|ment</HI> to puni&s;h them; but if they continue in their pertinacy and the <HI>Parlia|ment</HI> refu&s;e then to grant them a <HI>Toleration,</HI> it will no more be a Per&s;ecution, then it would be, to hinder men to bla&s;pheme Gods Name. 3. I cannot imi|tate them, for I have no power or authority, as tho&s;e, who&s;e practi&s;es I re|fute; Onely I pleade for the Truth, and &s;hew what &s;hould be done. 4. How|beit I had authority among&s;t the Dependents, as they have among&s;t tho&s;e pre|tended <HI>Independent</HI> Creatures; yet could I not imitate them, in refu&s;ing of a <HI>toleration;</HI> for the ca&s;e would not be the &s;ame, or alike. 5. And I grant you, that if the Cau&s;e ye maintain, were as ju&s;t, as it is unju&s;t, tho&s;e of <HI>New England</HI> &s;hould do well to refu&s;e us a <HI>Toleration.</HI> 6. And yet could they not &s;o ju&s;t|ly refu&s;e us our demand, as we refu&s;e you yours; for the <HI>Presbyterians,</HI> who
<PB N="164" REF="88">were Suitors for a <HI>Toleration</HI> in <HI>New England,</HI> were onely Suitors for <HI>Pres|byterians,</HI> and tho&s;e very few in number; whereas <HI>M. S.</HI> and his Collegues plead for a <HI>Toleration</HI> of all &s;orts of <HI>Independents,</HI> yea of all the Sects of the World, for any thing we know.</P>
<P>In the &s;ame Sect <HI>p.</HI> 103. He condemneth &s;uch practi&s;es in his <HI>Brethren</HI> of <HI>New England,</HI> in &s;aying, that in &s;uch proceedings, they <HI>ju&s;tified not them&s;elves in the &s;ight of God,</HI> viz. <HI>ju&s;titia cau&s;ae.</HI></P>
<P N="7">7. Neither doth either God, or our Con&s;cience judge us in &s;uch proceedings. i. e. Condemne us, for we judge according to Gods Word, that divers Sects, which yee would have <HI>Tolerated,</HI> are not to be <HI>Tolerated,</HI> but that they are all to be <HI>&s;uppre&s;&s;ed.</HI> 8. Whereas he &s;ayeth, that I am more of the Opinion of the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>New England,</HI> then the <HI>Apologi&s;ts,</HI> I am glad, that he is a&s;hamed of his Fathers.</P>
<P>And I agree with them in this, that <HI>Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks,</HI> and <HI>Idolaters,</HI> are not to be <HI>Tolerated</HI> by the <HI>Church</HI> of God, which the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>Old England</HI> deny mo&s;t boldly.</P>
<P>What yee &s;ay of the <HI>Independent Apologi&s;ts,</HI> that <HI>they profe&s;&s;e not per&s;ecution meerly for little differences in point of Di&s;cipline;</HI> I An&s;wer, 1. They do well to profe&s;&s;e it, &s;ince their power, as yet, is very &s;mall; But what they may pro|fe&s;&s;e, if they can get any power into their hands, we know not. 2. Onely we &s;ay, that the <HI>American Independents,</HI> who are <HI>Eju&s;dem &s;peciei</HI> with you, &s;o &s;oon as ever they had authority, did other wayes, then yee &s;ay the <HI>Apolo|geticall Independents</HI> do profe&s;&s;e without authority. 3. And it may be, that they being Mini&s;ters, will profe&s;&s;e it; but will you a&s;&s;ure us, that your Ma|gi&s;trats, who are <HI>Independents,</HI> &s;hall profe&s;&s;e the &s;ame?</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Addeth, if they did &s;o for want of light, mu&s;t this be a band of con|&s;cience upon them to <HI>bow down their backs,</HI> and to &s;uffer <HI>Presbyterian</HI> great|ne&s;&s;e to <HI>go over them, as &s;tones in the &s;treet?</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> In a word, this is to deny the con&s;equence of my Major, which I have confirmed. But I An&s;wer, 1. The Que&s;tion is not of <HI>Presbyterians;</HI> neither did I &s;peake of them in my Argument. 2. The <HI>Presbyterians,</HI> yea their Nationall <HI>Churches</HI> inflict none, but &s;pirituall puni&s;hments, which every <HI>Congregationall Independent Church,</HI> compounded, peradventure of &s;even, or eight, idle Fel|lowes onely arrogate unto them&s;elves. 3. What you &s;ay of the want of <HI>Light</HI> in the <HI>Independents</HI> of <HI>New England,</HI> it is ridiculous; for they &s;ay, that they have more <HI>Light,</HI> then all the <HI>Quinqu' Eccle&s;ian</HI> Mini&s;ters, and will hold you, as blind, as yee hold them: No wonder, that &s;o <HI>Independent Lights</HI> be &s;o contradictory one to another. 4. I wonder how yee can call that rather a <HI>Presbyterian greatne&s;&s;e,</HI> wherein the Spirit of Prophets &s;ubmit unto Prophets, and the le&s;&s;e unto the greater <HI>Light,</HI> then that, wherein &s;ix, or &s;even, &s;illy Fel|lowes, and a little <HI>Independent</HI> Mini&s;ter, be they never &s;o erronious in their Opinions, and execrable in their lives, will not &s;ubmit unto the whole Chri|&s;tian World.</P>
<PB N="165" REF="88">
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Again, he &s;ayes <HI>p.</HI> 104. that out of feare they are Suitors for a <HI>To|leration,</HI> if they do not be&s;tir them&s;elves by &s;ome means or other to prevent it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This is not <HI>Metus ju&s;tus, &s;ed inju&s;tus, qui non cadit in virum con&s;tan|tem,</HI> It is not a ju&s;t, but an unju&s;t feare, that becometh not men, but Children, who feare their own &s;hadowes at Noone-day; Some men do feare flies, and &s;uch is your feare, for it is a Maxime of our <HI>Di&s;cipline,</HI> that men &s;hould not be compelled to be Actors in any thing again&s;t their Con&s;cience; and this might &s;uffice to put you out of feare; which if it cannot do, we cannot cure <HI>Pi&s;anders</HI> feare: What ill u&s;age have you received here of the <HI>Parliament,</HI> that &s;hould make you &s;o fearefull? What you meane by your meanes to pre|vent it, I know not, unle&s;&s;e they be tho&s;e, that &s;ome of the People offered, who were &s;o capable of new impre&s;&s;ions, that the 5. <HI>Apologi&s;ts</HI> mention in their <HI>Apo|logie,</HI> or that other, viz. That the <HI>Independent</HI> party did offer to entertain 4000. men in the&s;e Wars, provided they might have had liberty to have made choy&s;e of their Commanders.</P>
<P>What he &s;ayes in the re&s;t of this &sect; in his 4. An&s;wer, is but a tale, and is &s;undry times an&s;wered.</P>
<P>As for that he &s;ayes in the next &sect; of my feare, it is a ju&s;t feare, grounded upon experience.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> Replyeth, 1. That &s;ome <HI>Independents</HI> hold, that all Sects and Opinions are to be <HI>Tolerated,</HI> as <HI>A. S.</HI> relateth. <HI>Ergo,</HI> In that ca&s;e, his Sect may be &s;ecured al&s;o.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I An&s;wer to the Antecedent; And that We feare al&s;o, viz. That ye would <HI>Tolerate</HI> all Sects, which we will not <HI>Tolerate.</HI> 2. VVe cannot be &s;e|cure among all Sects; for there be &s;ome that will not <HI>Tolerate</HI> us. 3. Ye &s;peak &s;o but for the pre&s;ent; but if ye had power, we know not what ye would do; It were better not to <HI>Tolerate</HI> Sects, when we can hinder them, then to bring them in among&s;t us, to <HI>tolerate</HI> us, and to give us &s;o ju&s;t a cau&s;e of feare. 4. I &s;aid onely, that there be &s;ome of you, who would <HI>Tolerate</HI> all Sects, who per|adventure are the far le&s;&s;er part, and &s;hould not prevaile in their Voices. 5. And we know not upon what tearmes they would <HI>tolerate</HI> us, if they were the &s;tronge&s;t. 6. Neither can your pretended probity &s;ecure us; we &s;ee the Ex|amples, and have the experience of your mercile&s;&s;e Pitty in <HI>New England,</HI> ye are all <HI>eju&s;dem farinae,</HI> and
<Q>Caelum, non animum mutat, qui trans mare currit.</Q></P>
<P>And what I &s;aid of your Piety, it can &s;erve you little. 1. For I &s;pake but of a few of you, viz. of the 5. <HI>Apologi&s;ts.</HI> 2. Becau&s;e, it was but a judgement of Charity, wherein I may be deceived, yea wherein I have been deceived. 3. Good men &s;ometimes may, for want of <HI>light,</HI> be <HI>dogged enough</HI> (to u&s;e your own tearmes) as ye grant your &s;elfe of your <HI>New England Independents.</HI></P>
<P>Unto his 3. Reply, That a poore <HI>Toleration</HI> is far from <HI>Superiority;</HI> it is true: But from a <HI>Toleration,</HI> it is to be feared, ye goe further: And if ye
<PB N="166" REF="89">can get the Civill Magi&s;trate drawn into your Faction, as in <HI>New-England,</HI> ye may be as <HI>dogged</HI> in a &s;hort time, as they are.</P>
<P>To the 4. Reply, That he thinketh not that I know any &s;uch I&s;land; It is a wonder that he knoweth it not, as well as I: but it is little to purpo&s;e; No more is his An&s;wer, for it is but a curri&s;h jeere, and toucheth not the Argu|ment at all. He puts in 5. a Jeere for a Rea&s;on; God have mercy on the &s;illy Argumenter.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> My 17. Argument was, That the Scripture forbiddeth all Toleration of Sects, <HI>Revel.</HI> 2.20. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 1.12. &amp; 3.3. &amp; 11.16, 18, 19, 20. <HI>Heb.</HI> 10.25. <HI>Gal.</HI> 5.12.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his 1. An&s;wer; <HI>The Scripture doth not forbid all, nor any &s;uch Tolera|tion, as the Apologi&s;ts de&s;ire;</HI> And remitteth us to his An&s;wer unto my 15. Rea&s;on: And I remit the Reader to my Reply.</P>
<P>To the Text of the <HI>Revelation,</HI> 2.20. he &s;aith, That by the Toleration of Jezabel, <HI>is not meant <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="UOM" EXTENT="1 letter"> Civill or State-toleration, but an Eccle&s;ia&s;tique or Church toleration.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Howbeit formally there only be meant an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;tique Toleration;</HI> yet by Con&s;equence it reaches to a <HI>State Toleration.</HI> 1. For what&s;oever the Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Senate or Presbytery is bound not to <HI>tolerate,</HI> but mu&s;t &s;uppre&s;&s;e in the Church; that the Civill Magi&s;trate or Senate is bound not to <HI>tolerate,</HI> but mu&s;t &s;uppre&s;&s;e in the State, &s;ince he is a Nur&s;e of the Church, and a Keeper of the two Tables. 2. And &s;o did the Judges and the Kings of Gods people. 3. And &s;o doe the Chri&s;tian Independent Magi|&s;trates in <HI>New-England.</HI> 4. Neither is the Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate le&s;&s;e bound to put it out of the State, then the Presbytery to put it out of the Church. 5. And I would willingly know of the five Apologi&s;ts their judgement upon this Point: neither beleeve I, that they dare &s;ay, or at lea&s;t doe beleeve, that he is not bound to &s;uppre&s;&s;e all &s;ort of Sects, that creep in into the Church, when the whole Kingdome profe&s;&s;eth the true Religion and Di&s;cipline. 6 However <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;ay, that they de&s;ire only a <HI>toleration</HI> for them&s;elves and their <HI>Churches</HI> in the State, yet he pleadeth for a <HI>toleration</HI> for all Schi&s;maticks, Hereticks, and Idolaters, that may &s;pring up, either in their own, or any o|ther Church. 7. Neither can the Civill Magi&s;trate, if he follow Gods Word, grant a Toleration without the con&s;ent of the Church, if he judge it is not corrupted. 8. And a Magi&s;trate &s;hould be wor&s;e then mad, that &s;hould permit a Sect to come into the Kingdome, to preach down the Go&s;pel, which he be|leeveth. 9. Neither can he be Orthodox, and <HI>tolerate</HI> a new Sect, unle&s;&s;e he tolerate us to believe, that he is either corrupted by monies, or &s;ome other way, &s;o to doe.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> his 2. An&s;wer (<HI>p.</HI> 105.) is, That &s;ince only the Church of <HI>Thyatira</HI> is here charged with this Toleration, evident it is, that the power of redre&s;&s;ing emerging enormities in a Church in every kind, is committed by Chri&s;t to
<PB N="167" REF="89">every particular Church re&s;pectively within it &s;elfe; and &s;o that they mu&s;t be cut off only by the particular Church, which is troubled by them, if there be no remedy otherwi&s;e.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> 1. At lea&s;t then, thus much I gaine by this Argument, as you confe&s;&s;e; That a particular Church mu&s;t cut off &s;uch as trouble her, and con&s;equently is bound not to <HI>tolerate</HI> them. 2. For the &s;ame rea&s;on, other Churches mu&s;t not <HI>tolerate</HI> them, &s;ince they are all &s;i&s;ter-Churches; <HI>Ergo,</HI> no Church mu&s;t tolerate them; <HI>Ergo,</HI> no member of the Church mu&s;t <HI>tolerate</HI> them; If no member, <HI>Ergo,</HI> the Civill Magi&s;trate in quality of a member of the Church, mu&s;t not tolerate them, or he mu&s;t tolerate them again&s;t his Con&s;cience: And what he cannot <HI>tolerate</HI> in the Church, as a member of the Chri&s;tian Church, that can he not <HI>tolerate</HI> in quality of a Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate in a Chri|&s;tian State, if he can hinder it: And if he hath power to puni&s;h &s;uch as trouble one particular Church, how much more hath he power to puni&s;h &s;uch, as trouble all the Churches in the Kingdome, as Schi&s;maticks, and Hereticks? The Civill Magi&s;trate then by con&s;equence may cut them off from the State. As for that Que&s;tion which <HI>M. S.</HI> moveth here about the Independent power of particular Congregations, it is not to the purpo&s;e; and we di&s;cu&s;&s;e it more at large in its own place.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> There mu&s;t be no &s;uch &s;peeches among us, as <HI>I am of Paul, I of A|pollos, &amp;c.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> We joyn heart and hand with you.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> And I with you; &s;o they mu&s;t not be <HI>tolerated,</HI> when they can be hindred.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> addeth here a <HI>But:</HI> 1. Every man that &s;aith, <HI>I am of Paul,</HI> or <HI>I am of Apollos,</HI> is not to be taught to &s;peak better by fining, impri&s;oning, un-Churching, or the like; but by &s;oundne&s;&s;e of Conviction.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer, as I have &s;undry times done: Sinners, according to the Doctrine of our Churches are, 1. To be heard; 2. To be &s;ufficiently convicted; 3. After &s;ufficient conviction, if they be pertinacious, to be puni&s;hed con|dignely by Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Cen&s;ures, <HI>viz.</HI> &s;u&s;pen&s;ion from the Lords Table, or Excommunication: And afterward the Civill Magi&s;trate is to doe his duty, as a Nur&s;e of the Church, in compelling them by the Civill power, to obey the Church: But in both the&s;e puni&s;hments, <HI>viz.</HI> Spirituall and Temporall, it is not for the Sinner to judge whether or no he be &s;ufficiently convicted, &s;ince he being a Party, cannot be Iudge in his own cau&s;e; but it is the part of the Ec|cle&s;ia&s;ticall Senate to judge, whether he be &s;ufficiently convicted <HI>in foro Eccle|&s;ia&s;tico;</HI> and of the Civill Magi&s;trate to judge, whether he be &s;ufficiently convi|cted <HI>in foro Civili,</HI> in that, whereof he is to judge.</P>
<P>To your 2. An&s;wer; I reply, That by <HI>Browni&s;ts, Independents, Anabapti&s;ts,</HI> &amp;c. I meane not the names, but the things &s;ignified by &s;uch names.</P>
<P><HI>A.S. Neither hath the Church of Goda cu&s;tome to be contentious,</HI> 1 Cor. 11.16.
<PB N="168" REF="90">This I brought to prove, that Schi&s;mes are not to be <HI>tolerated;</HI> for they breed Contentions in <HI>Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> 3. But he doth not &s;ay, that the&s;e <HI>Churches of God</HI> had any cu&s;tome to erect a <HI>Presbyterian throne,</HI> or a <HI>combined Elder&s;hip</HI> among&s;t them, to keep them from Contentions.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer you M. S. that I mu&s;t endure your impertinencie; 1. For if you had frequented our <HI>Presbyteries,</HI> you &s;hould have &s;een, that they have no Throne. 2. You might have &s;een, that by this Argument I intended not to prove a <HI>combined Presbytery,</HI> as you call it; but the <HI>intolerablene&s;&s;e</HI> of a <HI>toleration</HI> of <HI>Sects.</HI> I prove &s;ufficiently el&s;ewhere, what you can de&s;ire about the <HI>&s;ubordination</HI> of <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Judicatories.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Neither permitteth the <HI>Apo&s;tle</HI> Schi&s;mes.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> &s;aith, that he hath already an&s;wered this.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> &s;aith, that he hath replied to <HI>M. S.</HI> his An&s;wer.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> We mu&s;t not quit our mutuall meetings, as others doe, and as mu&s;t be done in a publike Toleration, (<HI>Heb.</HI> 10.25.)</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> We under&s;tand not your words.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But they are the Apo&s;tles words. 2. And my Argument may ea&s;ily be formed by any Logician, again&s;t <HI>Toleration;</HI> It will be thus:</P>
<P>What maketh us to quit our mutuall meetings, as others doe, is not to be tolerated:</P>
<P>But Schi&s;mes and Here&s;ies make us to quit our mutuall meetings: <HI>Ergo,</HI> They are not to be tolerated.</P>
<P><HI>M.S.</HI> We doe not know, what <HI>quitting of meetings</HI> there is like to be more under a <HI>publique Toleration,</HI> then is for the pre&s;ent.</P>
<P><HI>A.S.</HI> So he &s;eemeth to deny the Minor; but I prove it; for in <HI>tolerating</HI> of Schi&s;mes, we &s;ee, that men, being deceived by the Schi&s;maticks, doe quit the meetings of the Church, to which before they were joyned: And we &s;ee, how the <HI>Independents</HI> frequent not willingly our Churches, and will not all joyne with us in our meetings at the Lords Table: Neither beleeve I, that any of the five Apologetick Mini&s;ters have ever communicated in our A&s;&s;emblies, &s;ince this Parliament.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 18. Becau&s;e that <HI>M.S.</HI> chargeth my 18. Rea&s;on with Athei&s;me, I will put it in forme:</P>
<P>That which <HI>per &s;e,</HI> giveth offence unto Papi&s;ts, and others, or that expo&s;eth the Prote&s;tant Churches unto the calumnies of Papi&s;ts, &s;hould not be granted by us:</P>
<P>But, the Toleration of many Sects doth &s;o; <HI>Ergo,</HI> it is not to be granted.</P>
<P>The Major is certaine; for it is <HI>&s;candalum datum,</HI> which all Divines doe condemne.</P>
<P>The Minor, I prove it; for it giveth, and the Papi&s;ts thereupon take too
<PB N="169" REF="90">ju&s;t a cau&s;e of Scandall or Offence; and indeed it cannot but be a ju&s;t &s;ubject of Offence, by to open to be reproached with &s;uch an innumerable number of Sects, to the renting of Chri&s;ts Churches in peeces.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> to this an&s;wereth not, but propoundeth &s;ome Que&s;tions.</P>
<P N="1">1. Will you, &s;aith he, redeem your &s;elf out of the hands of the Papi&s;ts ca|lumnies by &s;ymbolizing with them?</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I An&s;wer, 1. That it is no &s;ymbolizing with Papi&s;ts if we <HI>tolerate</HI> not <HI>Hereticks</HI> and <HI>Schi&s;maticks;</HI> for you have already confe&s;&s;ed, that in your <HI>particular Churches</HI> you <HI>tolerate</HI> them not; and yet you beleeve that your <HI>Churches</HI> &s;ymbolize no more with them then ours. 2. It is a &s;trange thing, if my Argument be <HI>Atheologicall,</HI> if it prove, that <HI>Athei&s;ts</HI> and &s;uch as deny the <HI>Trinity,</HI> and the <HI>Incarnation</HI> of the Son of God, are not to be <HI>tolerated;</HI> If &s;uch an Argument be <HI>Atheologicall</HI> in your judgement, I am a&s;&s;ured that all <HI>Theo|logues</HI> will conceive better of it, then of this your <HI>Theologicall An&s;wer.</HI> Nei|ther have I forgot my 11. Rea&s;on, for you &s;ymbolize with them in their Po|pery, and I in true <HI>Theologie,</HI> viz. in maintaining the Unity of the <HI>Church</HI> with Saint <HI>Paul,</HI> as you &s;ymbolize with <HI>Sectaries</HI> in maintaining the <HI>renting</HI> of the <HI>Church</HI> by <HI>Schi&s;mes:</HI> If you had &s;hewen any Contradiction in my words, I had either an&s;wered it, or, if I could not, I &s;hould have rendered my &s;elf to the truth: But <HI>M. S.</HI> will not prove it, but terrifies me, as a Child, with his great words; It &s;eemeth, (&s;aith he) <HI>Contradictions, Incon&s;i&s;tencyes, Impertinencyes, &V;n-intelligibilities, &s;ence, non-&s;ence, any thing, nothing, &amp;c. A. S.</HI> All this is no &s;ence, nothing, but words and wind of <HI>Goodwin.</HI></P>
<P>As for the <HI>19th.</HI> Rea&s;on, he remitteth us to the former Que&s;tion to &s;eeke an An&s;wer.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 20. If it (i. e. <HI>Toleration</HI>) be granted, it cannot, but be thought, that it hath been granted, or rather extorted by force of rea&s;on, and that all the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> were not able to an&s;wer our <HI>Brethren,</HI> whereas indeed their O|pinions and Demands are again&s;t all Rea&s;on, as &s;undry of them&s;elves could not deny, and had nothing to &s;ay, &s;ave onely that it was Gods Ordinance, which yet they could never &s;hew out of Gods Word: On the contrary, if it be re|fu&s;ed, it will help to confirme the <HI>Churches,</HI> and the people in the truth.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> In &s;ub&s;tance, 1. denieth that a <HI>Toleration</HI> will &s;eeme to be extor|ted, if it be granted.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But if a thing &s;o ab&s;urd, and again&s;t all Piety be granted by &s;o vener|able an <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> wherein things are carried by Rea&s;on, it cannot &s;eeme but extorted by Rea&s;on.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> &s;aith, that I tell the <HI>A&s;&s;embly,</HI> that how&s;oever their Con&s;ciences might &s;avour the <HI>Independents</HI> in point of <HI>Toleration,</HI> yet their credits and repu|tations would &s;uffer by it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> It is fal&s;e; there is no &s;uch expre&s;&s;ion in my Booke, it is not my ex|pre&s;&s;ion, but <HI>M. S.</HI> his fiction and impo&s;ture.</P>
<PB N="170" REF="91">
<P>Neither &s;hould the <HI>A&s;&s;embly</HI> (in my poore Opinion) &s;o ea&s;ily &s;uffer them|&s;elves to be intreated for ill; neither is there any mercy in <HI>tolerating</HI> and not &s;uppre&s;&s;ing of <HI>Schi&s;mes</HI> and <HI>Here&s;ies,</HI> as <HI>M. S.</HI> beleeveth.</P>
<P>M. S. denieth, that their Opinion and Demand is again&s;t all Rea&s;on, but I have &s;undry times proved it, viz. Becau&s;e, by &s;uch a <HI>Toleration</HI> of <HI>Independen|cy,</HI> all &s;orts of <HI>Here&s;ies</HI> will creepe into the <HI>Church;</HI> and it is mo&s;t ab&s;urd, that there &s;hould be no <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall</HI> power to repre&s;&s;e the <HI>Here&s;ies</HI> and abominable &s;ins of &s;even or eight wicked Fellowes, whereof a particular <HI>Independent Church</HI> may be compoed, in ca&s;e they fall into <HI>Here&s;ie,</HI> or &s;uch abominable &s;ins.</P>
<P>Whereas M. S. &s;aies, that it is not like, that &s;o very learned men, &amp;c. &s;uch as are the 5. <HI>Apologi&s;ts,</HI> &s;hould ri&s;e up to defend an opinion &s;o contrary to all rea&s;on.</P>
<P>A. S. It is more like that learned men of great abilities &s;hould do &s;o, then ignorants that have not the abilities. The Devill is learn|eder, then they all, and yet &s;u&s;teineth as ab&s;urd Opinions: Divine <HI>Plato</HI> as learned, as they, defended the Community of Wives, of Children, and Goods: <HI>Zeno</HI> did maintaine, that there was no moving at all: So did &s;undry great Philo&s;ophers maintaine great Errors; and great Divines, as <HI>Origine,</HI> and &s;un|dry of the Fathers &s;trangely mi&s;tooke &s;undry things. If-they be &s;o Learned, I may &s;ay of them, what an other &s;aid of a very Learned man, <HI>&V;bi bene, nemo, meli&ugrave;s, ubi mal&egrave;, nemo pej&ugrave;s,</HI> where they do well, no men do better; where they do ill, no man doeth wor&s;e: For, <HI>Optima, cum degenerant, fiunt pe&s;&s;ima,</HI> as the Philo&s;ophers tell us. If formerly I gave them &s;o great prai&s;es, it was out of Charity, which they &s;hould not take in <HI>rigore ju&s;titiae:</HI> And I mu&s;t tell you, that I have been grievou&s;ly cen&s;ured for that my Charitable judgement, and that by very learned and godly Divines, both here by word of mouth, and by &s;ome others abroad by Letters, which I could ea&s;ily &s;hew, if occa&s;ion re|quired. What if my Charity gave them as great prai&s;es as they were capable of? However it be, great men may have great Errours; what if there be a great Pride with great Learning, &s;ince it is mo&s;t certain that <HI>Scientia inflat?</HI></P>
<P>Neither, for all their Plea for the power of godline&s;&s;e among&s;t them above all the World, and that they do what <HI>Fle&s;h and Bloud can do in any juncture of time to come,</HI> mu&s;t they pleade, that they are without &s;in.</P>
<P>I thought not, that &s;uch prai&s;es would &s;o have puffed them up, as to have made them thus bragging in their Writings; For if they an&s;wer not my commen|dations of them, they affront me; and then I &s;hall pray them not to be proud of my prai&s;es, but to merit them: And I &s;hall intreat others to pardon my mi|&s;taken Charity; Bring not my Charity by any meanes for an Argument again&s;t me: Beleeve, I pray you, that prai&s;es &s;ignifie rather the vertue, that &s;hould be, and that we expect of men, then that, that evermore is.</P>
<P>If you, and they, will not be &s;uch, as I take you to be, you mu&s;t give me leave to take you for &s;uch, as ye are.</P>
<P>As for the Proto&s;tants in <HI>France,</HI> their example of Suing for a <HI>toleration</HI>
<PB N="171" REF="91">of their <HI>Religion,</HI> &s;erves you nothing; 1. For they have obtained it, as I told you, by the &s;word, in fighting for their <HI>Prote&s;tant Prince,</HI> again&s;t Papi&s;ts; 2. And their <HI>Di&s;cipline</HI> opens not a gate to all <HI>Here&s;ies</HI> and <HI>Licenciou&s;ne&s;&s;e,</HI> as yours. 3. And if they had had no greater difference with the Papi&s;ts, then the Independents &s;ay they have with us, they had never been &s;o mad as to have either fought, or &s;ued &s;o long for it. 4. They were compelled to Idolatry, and to be Actors in the damnation of their own &s;ouls, again&s;t the light of their Con&s;ciences; but ye can &s;ay no &s;uch thing for your &s;elves; neither is it more rea&s;on, that &s;uch Prote&s;tants, as ye are, &s;hould be rather <HI>tolerated</HI> by Prote&s;tants; for <HI>your Di&s;cipline,</HI> as I have &s;undry times &s;aid, openeth a door to all Here&s;ies and Corruptions, that Satan can invent; it is wor&s;e by con|&s;equence a hundred times, then either Popery or Arminiani&s;m are formally.</P>
<P>As for your eminent de&s;erts and merits, 1. I know them not. 2. As &s;ome Independents may merit, and de&s;erve well of the State; &s;o may others deme|rit as much. 3. But no man can merit a licentiou&s;ne&s;&s;e to be wicked, and to bring a mi&s;chief upon the State and Church both, &s;uch as a Toleration of all Sects and Here&s;ies would bring: If you cannot &s;ubmit unto a common Go|vernment of the Church, as others, and live <HI>more humano,</HI> it is again&s;t all rea&s;on, that ye &s;hould be <HI>tolerated;</HI> neither mu&s;t Religion be framed according to your Accommodation, as you pretend, but your Accommodation rather ac|cording to Religion. To your Demand about tho&s;e that are of my Iudgement; they needed not to be &s;uiters for a Toleration; for the Di&s;cipline, that they &s;uffered for, was already e&s;tabli&s;hed by Law; As for the re&s;t of this Section, it containeth onely his proud Iudgement of my Rea&s;ons, and &s;ome fooleries, which I hold it not worth the while, to take notice of.</P>
<P>To your <HI>&s;econdly,</HI> I an&s;wer, that tho&s;e, of whom I &s;ay, that &s;undry of them|&s;elves could not deny it, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> are not the five Apologi&s;ts, but others Inde|pendent Mini&s;ters, and &s;ome of the able&s;t among them, whom I did entertain upon that di&s;cour&s;e: And <HI>M. S.</HI> him&s;elf telleth us, <HI>Suppo&s;e that cour&s;e or means, which the Apologi&s;ts in&s;i&s;t upon, be not in the eye of rea&s;on or humane conjecture, a mean &s;ufficient for &s;uch a purpo&s;e; yet if it be a means, which God hath authorized for the effecting, it will do the deed.</HI> Here he mi&s;tru&s;teth the rea&s;on, and appealeth to Gods Word, whereof we &s;ee nothing here.</P>
<P N="3">3. <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;aith, that they have &s;hewn it from Gods Word; but God and men (it &s;eems) are not yet agreed to have it &s;o generally &s;een, as is to be de&s;ired.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Neither is it &s;hewn, neither can it appear, <HI>Nam non entis nulla &s;unt accidentia,</HI> things that are not, have no Accidents, neither can they be &s;een; And what men can agree unto, I know not; for &s;ome times they dream, that they &s;ee things, that are not: But &s;ure I am, that God will never agree, that it be according to his Word. And what you &s;ay of your hope, all the Kings of the World cannot hinder you to hope; for no man is without all hope, but
<PB N="172" REF="92">the damned &s;ouls in Hell: Onely this I &s;ay, That of your hope, you may &s;ay, <HI>O &s;pes inanes.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> To that, where I &s;ay, the refu&s;all of a <HI>toleration</HI> will help to confirm the Churches, and the people in the Truth: He an&s;wers, That he knoweth not in what truth: Therefore I tell him, that I mean the Truth of our Di&s;cipline, and the Truth; how intolerable is a <HI>toleration</HI> of Sects, and of &s;o dangerous a Sect: And the rea&s;on is, becau&s;e, that if ever the re&s;t of the Churches or the People, &s;ee &s;o venerable and learned an A&s;&s;embly conde&s;cend to &s;uch an ab&s;urd Opinion and Demand, they will not beleeve, that it is &s;o ab&s;urd, as it is; For many men are led by Authority, and take many things upon the tru&s;t of great men; or when they &s;ee &s;uch an A&s;&s;embly conde&s;cend unto &s;uch errours, they will not be &s;o diligent to enquire for the Truth, as otherwayes they might be.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 21. Argument. Neither can it, <HI>viz. Toleration,</HI> but overthrow all &s;ort of <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Government;</HI> for a man being cen&s;ured in one Church, may fly to an other; and being again &s;u&s;pended in that other, fly from thence to another; and &s;o &s;corn all the Churches of God, and their Cen&s;ures; and &s;o this Order, by nece&s;&s;ary con&s;equence, will breed all &s;ort of di&s;order.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> An&s;wereth, 1. That he joyeth, that I Prophe&s;ie, that the <HI>Independ|ent Government</HI> will overthrow all other <HI>Government,</HI> and addeth, <HI>Faxit Deus.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. My words contain no prophe&s;ie, but a con&s;equence. 2. I &s;aid not, that the <HI>Independent Government,</HI> which is no <HI>Government,</HI> but <HI>aequivoc&egrave;,</HI> as <HI>canis coele&s;tis</HI> is <HI>canis;</HI> but that the <HI>toleration</HI> of <HI>Independent Government</HI> would overthrow all Government. 3. In the 2. &sect;. of that Page 110. he acknowledgeth his mi&s;take, becau&s;e of my following words: And &s;o this Order by nece&s;&s;ary Con&s;equence will breed all &s;ort of di&s;order.</P>
<P>To this <HI>M.S.</HI> an&s;wereth, 1. That it will not breed the di&s;order of oppre&s;|&s;ing Con&s;ciencious men, for Con&s;cience &s;ake.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. <HI>All &s;ort of di&s;order</HI> mu&s;t not be taken <HI>pro &s;ingulis generum, &s;ed pro generibus &s;ingulorum.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. The <HI>Syncategorema, all,</HI> there &s;ignifies onely a great number of di&s;|orders.</P>
<P N="3">3. No more doth the Presbyterian Order oppre&s;&s;e Con&s;ciencious men, or do any thing, that you tell there.</P>
<P N="4">4. Howbeit it breed not tho&s;e di&s;orders, which you mention there, yet it breedeth &s;undry other di&s;orders, which we have already demon&s;trated.</P>
<P N="5">5. It oppre&s;&s;eth Con&s;ciencious men, 1. In hindering them to get their Con&s;ciences fully &s;atisfied in a higher Indicatory. 2. By an ab&s;olute authori|ty of &s;even or eight idle, yea, peradventure debauched Knaves, who howbeit their Opinions were never &s;o Hereticall, and their practi&s;es never &s;o tyran|nicall, will not &s;ubmit, but oppre&s;&s;e men better then them&s;elves, compell
<PB N="173" REF="92">them to be gone from their Congregation, and &s;o undo them, 3. In making them to attend, peradventure a yeer, or two, before they will meet with other Churches, to have their unju&s;t Iudgement judged and rever&s;ed; of which practi&s;es, &s;ee &s;undry very &s;trange Stories in Ma&s;ter <HI>Edwards</HI> Book, who knoweth them <HI>intus &amp; in cute;</HI> which one of their Sect, writing in their favour not many dayes ago, doth ingenuou&s;ly confe&s;&s;e, <HI>They make not</HI> (indeed) <HI>men to walk &s;undry miles, for what they might have at home;</HI> but they &s;undry times oppre&s;&s;e them at home, and undo them, for what they might have gotten within a few miles, for the hundred part of the lo&s;&s;e that they &s;uffered at home; whereof &s;ee Ma&s;ter <HI>Edwards</HI> his <HI>Antapologia.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. <HI>M. S.</HI> denieth, that they may run from Church to Church: But I prove it, for if other Churches be Independent of all <HI>Authoritative Power,</HI> they may admit them; and howbeit, they could not run from Church to Church, yet could they &s;et up a Church them&s;elves, compounded of &s;even or eight debauched Fellows like unto them&s;elves, as they do here in <HI>London.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> &s;corneth to an&s;wer the re&s;t of my Rea&s;ons, amounting to the number of &s;even, under pretext, that I &s;ay, that I omitted them; but however I omit them, the judicious Reader will do well to take notice of them.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> in all this Chapter bringeth but one onely Text of Scripture for his Opinion, and that not by way of Argument, but of An&s;wer to one of my Arguments; but in the beginning of it, he hath &s;ome ten frivolous Arguments grounded on the corrupt Rea&s;on of his own brains, which I will here &s;et down in order, and an&s;wer them; hoping through Gods Mercy, that the very weak|ne&s;&s;e of the Independents Rea&s;ons, (howbeit we brought no Rea&s;ons at all again&s;t them) would evidently &s;hew, how &s;leight their Opinions, and how fond their conceits are.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> Suppo&s;e the Opinion, maintained in the latter part of the &s;econd Chapter, were waved, and &s;uch a <HI>Coercive Power,</HI> in matters of Religion, as <HI>A. S.</HI> contends for, allowed in the Magi&s;trates hand; yet, that any man &s;hould plead for the drawing of his &s;word again&s;t tho&s;e men, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> And a little after, that any (I &s;ay) on this &s;ide of <HI>malignancy,</HI> &s;hould con&s;ult the &s;orrow, trouble, di&s;grace, &s;uppre&s;&s;ion, ruine of men &s;o holy, &s;o harmle&s;&s;e, of &s;uch eminent de&s;ert in the Cau&s;e of Religion, State, Kingdom, me thinks &s;hould exceed the line of Humanity, and be thought &s;ome In&s;piration or Sugge&s;tion from the great Enemy of mankinde.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. This Di&s;cour&s;e &s;eemeth to imply two Arguments.</P>
<P>Fir&s;t, Men very holy, very harmle&s;&s;e, of very eminent de&s;erts in the Cau&s;e of Religion, State, Kingdom, &s;hould not receive &s;orrow, trouble, di&s;|grace, &s;uppre&s;&s;ion, or ruine.</P>
<P>But we the Independents are &s;uch. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;econd Argument, They who plead for the drawing of the &s;word,
<PB N="174" REF="93">con&s;ult &s;orrow, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> again&s;t &s;o holy men, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> have &s;ome In&s;piration from the Devill, or great Enemy of mankinde.</P>
<P>But <HI>A. S.</HI> pleads for the drawing of the &s;word, <HI>&amp;c. Ergo.</HI></P>
<P>To the fir&s;t Argument I an&s;wer: 1. In generall, That I am &s;orry, that this <HI>M. S.</HI> will hazard the Independents honour in &s;o weak an Argument; for if I deny the Minor, they will pre&s;ently cry out, that I offend their pretended <HI>Power of Piety, their harmle&s;&s;ene&s;&s;e,</HI> &amp;c. And therefore, not to offend them, I will not &s;ay, that they are not &s;uch: Onely I &s;ay, that who&s;oever pleads for a <HI>Toleration</HI> of all damnable and mo&s;t dete&s;table Hereticks, (&s;uch as deny the Trinity, the Incarnation of the Son of God, his Mediator&s;hip, who call him a Knave, and an Impo&s;tor, who died for us all) as this <HI>M. S.</HI> doth here in his Book, can neither be <HI>holy</HI> nor <HI>harmle&s;&s;e.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. I deny the Major, if it be taken ab&s;olutely, without any di&s;tinction; for if <HI>the Righteous turn from his righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e, and do the thing that is wicked, he &s;hall die therein, Ezek.</HI> 33.28. So they are not to &s;uffer for their harmle&s;&s;ene&s;&s;e, and eminent gifts, but for &s;omething wor&s;e.</P>
<P N="3">3. I mu&s;t &s;ay, That the Minor &s;melleth &s;omewhat the Phari&s;ee, who &s;eemed ju&s;t in his own eyes: And to &s;ay nothing el&s;e, we can produce you a great number of Independents, and Independent Mini&s;ters no better, then other mortall men.</P>
<P>To the &s;econd Argument, I an&s;wer to the Major. 1. <HI>They have &s;ome in|&s;piration,</HI> &amp;c. if they <HI>con&s;ult &s;orrow</HI> again&s;t them for their <HI>holine&s;&s;e,</HI> it is true: But the Minor is fal&s;e; for I never pleaded any &s;orrow again&s;t them, for their <HI>holine&s;&s;e;</HI> neither am I minded to plead any <HI>&s;orrow,</HI> or the drawing of the &s;word again&s;t them; but onely again&s;t &s;uch who are turbulent, and trouble the <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>State;</HI> who <HI>erect Churches in de&s;pite of the Parliament,</HI> or overthrow <HI>the Kings, the Parliaments, and all Civill Magi&s;trates Authority,</HI> about the <HI>Church</HI> and <HI>Religion.</HI></P>
<P>I will not an&s;wer unto this Independents Injuries, when he calleth all tho&s;e, <HI>Malignants,</HI> who plead for the Civill Magi&s;trates Power, as I do, and <HI>men in&s;pired</HI> by the <HI>Devill.</HI> Onely this I &s;ay, That if &s;uch men who curb &s;o the Kings, the Parliaments, and all Civill Magi&s;trates Authority, in &s;uch a manner, &s;hould be protected and maintained by them, as they pretend they &s;hould be, and vaunt they will be, (which yet I hope &s;hall never be) that <HI>turdus &s;ibi malum cacat,</HI> and that they are worthy to drink &s;uch, as they brew.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> The Independents have &s;uch a con&s;iderable &s;trength, if not of evidence, yet of rea&s;on for what they practi&s;e and profe&s;&s;e: <HI>A. S. Ergo,</HI> I know not what. I think he would infer, they &s;hould not &s;uffer &s;orrow, but be <HI>tolerated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I know not what <HI>M. S.</HI> meaneth by his <HI>&s;trength</HI> here, for he &s;eemeth to &s;ay, That it is <HI>&s;trength</HI> of <HI>rea&s;on,</HI> and then we deny the Antece|dent;
<PB N="175" REF="93">for if they had any, they &s;hould do well to &s;hew it, and not to vaunt of it. 2. He is not confident to call it evident: <HI>Ergo,</HI> It is inevident and ob&s;cure: <HI>Ergo,</HI> It is uncertain, if the&s;e <HI>rea&s;ons</HI> or <HI>&s;trength</HI> be taken from <HI>Nature;</HI> for in <HI>Nature,</HI> all <HI>Rea&s;ons</HI> that are inevident are uncertain; if he meaneth <HI>Rea&s;ons</HI> taken from <HI>divine Authority,</HI> then he needed not to doubt, in &s;aying, if <HI>not in evidence;</HI> for all Arguments, taken from <HI>divine Authority,</HI> are inevident: And the meane&s;t Logicians know, that <HI>Argumentum ab Au|thoritate ductum, e&s;t inevidens &amp; inartificiale:</HI> And Faith, which is evermore inevident, is &s;uch, becau&s;e that it is grounded upon Authority, <HI>Heb.</HI> 11.1.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 2. They, <HI>i. e.</HI> Independents have a like, if not a more con&s;iderable &s;trength again&s;t that way of Government, which they cannot &s;ubmit unto. <HI>A. S. Ergo,</HI> What followeth? They mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated?</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. Is this to argue, to a&s;&s;ume the Antecedent in both the&s;e Argu|ments &s;o peremptoriou&s;ly without any proof? Truely a Midwife might have argued every jot as well: I deny it; and let the Reader judge of both our Rea&s;ons.</P>
<P N="2">2. I deny the Con&s;equence; for howbeit they had as con&s;iderable a &s;trength of Rea&s;ons, as the other way; yet &s;hould not their way be admitted; for if the other be already approved by Authority, and the Independent way not yet admitted, the old way, which is as probable as theirs, is not to be put away for yours; For all Changes in Church, and State, are very dangerous, unle&s;&s;e &s;ome urgent nece&s;&s;ity pre&s;&s;e it.</P>
<P N="3">3. And there is &s;omething in their way, which may ea&s;ily overthrow all States and Churches, wherein it may be admitted.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 3. They are by their fierce&s;t Adver&s;aries, and Oppo&s;ites them&s;elves, acknowledged ten times over for very <HI>pious, godly,</HI> and <HI>learned men. Ergo,</HI> They mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> The&s;e men are almo&s;t mad, in <HI>prai&s;ing,</HI> and in <HI>hearing</HI> of others <HI>prai&s;e</HI> their <HI>Piety, Godline&s;&s;e,</HI> and <HI>Learning,</HI> as if this were the <HI>finis ultimus</HI> of this Sect: Neither ever heard I of any Sect &s;o fooli&s;h, as this, that is ever more trumpeting abroad its own prai&s;es. <HI>We</HI> are <HI>holy; we</HI> are <HI>pious; we</HI> have the <HI>power</HI> of <HI>piety:</HI> And <HI>all</HI> the <HI>World acknowledges us for holy men;</HI> And there is <HI>none,</HI> that have the <HI>power</HI> of <HI>piety,</HI> or like to have <HI>it in any juncture</HI> of time to come, as <HI>we have it.</HI> The&s;e &s;eem rather the Expre&s;&s;ions of &s;ome di&s;tem|pered brain, or at lea&s;t of a man very vain, then of any wi&s;e or godly Chri|&s;tian: Wherefore, in&s;tead of &s;paring of you, and concealing &s;ome of the&s;e weakne&s;&s;es of yours, which I thought to have pa&s;&s;ed over in &s;ilence; &s;ince I am put to it, hear what I &s;ay to the Argument.</P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. I deny then the Con&s;equence; for howbeit &s;ome acknowledge you for &s;uch, yet they are but very few, who acknowledge you &s;uch; 2. And yet it is but <HI>To&s;timonium humanum,</HI> which is onely a <HI>Topick,</HI> or <HI>probable,</HI> and no <HI>certain</HI> or <HI>nece&s;&s;ary</HI> Argument. 3. It is but the Te&s;timony of one man, <HI>viz.</HI>
<PB N="176" REF="94">of <HI>A. S.</HI> whereof (for any thing I know) ye make little e&s;teem. 4. I deny, That if <HI>A. S.</HI> commend you for &s;ome good. <HI>Ergo,</HI> Ye &s;hould be <HI>tolerated</HI> in your fooli&s;h, and pernicious practi&s;es, which cannot, but in all morall proba|bility, overthrow the State, and the Church of God: There mu&s;t onely be one Government admitted in the Church, what ever it be, whether yours, ours, or any other, and that for fear of Divi&s;ions.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. As for the Antecedent, indeed it was my judgement of <HI>Charity,</HI> which <HI>&s;uffereth long, and is kinde; envieth not; vaunteth not it &s;elf,</HI> as ye do, <HI>is not puffed up,</HI> as ye are; that <HI>is not ea&s;ily provoked, thinketh not evil; beareth all things, beleeveth all things; hopeth all things; endureth all things,</HI> 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 13.4, 5, 7. But &s;ince that time having read <HI>M. S.</HI> his Book (licenced, doubtle&s;&s;e|ly, by &s;ome Independent, or &s;ome other di&s;gui&s;ed per&s;on) &s;o &s;tuffed with the&s;e his impious Maximes again&s;t the Church, the State, and all Piety, and with mine own ears, heard &s;ome very dangerous Expre&s;&s;ions of the Sectaries, who pa&s;&s;e under the name of Independents, I have at lea&s;t changed much, or &s;u&s;pended my former judgement of them; <HI>For Charity rejoyteth not in Iniqui|ty, but rejoyceth in the Truth.</HI></ITEM>
</LIST>
<P>I will not &s;peak ill of your <HI>per&s;ons;</HI> but if Ma&s;ter <HI>Edwards</HI> have &s;uch things under the Independents hands, as his Book mentions, as in <HI>Charity</HI> I am bound to beleeve he hath, I am bound to think otherwayes, then I have done, of your Opinions. And howbeit, I had never heard, or read any &s;uch things of the Independents; yet it is too much for you (Sir) &s;o proudly to in&s;ult up|on a bare judgement of <HI>Charity;</HI> Know you not, that <HI>prai&s;es</HI> and great <HI>commendations</HI> of <HI>vertues,</HI> are rather to &s;hew what men &s;hould be, then alwayes what they are. <HI>Wi&s;e</HI> and <HI>godly men</HI> re&s;t not &s;o much upon other mens Te&s;timonies, as upon that of a good Con&s;cience.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 4. Argument: <HI>Independents</HI> have been (at lea&s;t the generality of them) and &s;o continue, <HI>men</HI> of the <HI>mo&s;t affectionate,</HI> and with all the mo&s;t effectuall <HI>activity</HI> and <HI>forwardne&s;&s;e,</HI> to <HI>promote</HI> the great <HI>cau&s;e of Religion, Parliament,</HI> and <HI>Kingdom. Ergo,</HI> Without all doubt they mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. It is a wonder, how this man is not a&s;hamed, bringing &s;o little rea&s;on for his Conclu&s;ion, &s;o to vaunt. 2. This Antecedent is odious, containing nothing el&s;e, but a proud and impertinent compari&s;on. I &s;hould be &s;orry to go on upon this fooli&s;h way with him: God knoweth, who have mo&s;t advanced the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e, or retarded it: Truely, it is the common &s;peech of wi&s;e men, that none but the <HI>Independent Faction retards Bu&s;ine&s;&s;es</HI> in the <HI>A&s;&s;embly.</HI> 3. If the way to promote the <HI>bu&s;ine&s;&s;e,</HI> be to plead for <HI>impunity,</HI> in favour of Gods Enemies, of all Heretiques and Schi&s;matiques, this <HI>M. S.</HI> indeed then promoteth it, as much as any man. 4. As for the <HI>activity</HI> of your <HI>Faction,</HI> ye are all but too active in tho&s;e things, wherein your pains were a great deal better &s;pared.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his fifth Argument. <HI>Independents</HI> are as <HI>deep in,</HI> or (if you will) as
<PB N="177" REF="94"><HI>much out</HI> of their <HI>E&s;tates</HI> rateably, for the <HI>&s;upport of this Cau&s;e,</HI> as any other <HI>&s;ort</HI> of men what&s;oever. <HI>Ergo,</HI> They mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated</HI> in their <HI>Religion</HI> and <HI>practi&s;es.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. And yet will he continue, as the Phari&s;ees did, to publi&s;h with &s;ound of Trumpet, the Works of <HI>Supererogation</HI> of the <HI>Independent Sect.</HI> 2. Yea, but what if many &s;ay, that many of them have bettered their E&s;tates by this War? 3. I will not enter into conte&s;tation with this man, about mens <HI>disbur&s;ements</HI> in this <HI>Cau&s;e;</HI> for I never reckoned with them, what was in their pur&s;es, or how much they are now out of pur&s;e: But it &s;eemeth, that <HI>M. S.</HI> hath calculated to a Farthing every mans E&s;tate, and what he hath laid out in this War: If &s;o, I pray you <HI>M. S.</HI> tell me, what Souldiers and Officers; whether of the <HI>Independents, Presbyterians,</HI> or others, have been be&s;t payed? 4. I deny the Con&s;equence; for they mu&s;t not buy a <HI>toleration</HI> of their odde wayes and practi&s;es with Mony; for that were no better, then Simony; if they laid it out with aym at any &s;uch thing, they are worthy to be deceived.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;ixth Argument. They have many of them, &s;uch as were meet for &s;uch a Service, adventured their Per&s;ons and Lives in the face of the rage and fury of the common Enemy, continuing &s;till in the &s;ame Ingagements. <HI>Ergo,</HI> They mu&s;t be <HI>tolerated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. Will you never de&s;i&s;t from bragging of your Independent <HI>merits,</HI> and from making of the&s;e odious compari&s;ons. 2. It is a &s;trange thing, that this <HI>M. S.</HI> who, as I hear, is but a Mini&s;ter, having no other Calling, can judge &s;o peremptoriou&s;ly of all mens <HI>E&s;tates, Piety,</HI> and <HI>Valour:</HI> Men, who knoweth him not, in reading of &s;uch Stories, would think, that he had been evermore in the Field; and had &s;een a proof of every particular mans valour in all the&s;e Fights. 3. But did not many others, that were but merce|nary, yea, eightpeny Souldiers, as much? 4. And yet will ye not infer, I trow, from thence, that they merit a <HI>toleration</HI> in their wicked wayes. 5. It is a poor advantage for you, to compare your &s;elves with good men, in that where|in many ill men, yea, wicked men may compare with you both, yea, and per|chance go beyond you. 6. They have indeed done well; but it was for the maintenance of their E&s;tates, for their Countrey, and for their Liber|ties, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> But the <HI>French,</HI> yea, others al&s;o, and tho&s;e <HI>Presbyterians,</HI> came out of their Countrey, that had no E&s;tates, or Liberties here to lo&s;e; and yet did what they could for the Cau&s;e; and yet will not I compare them with any others, for fear lea&s;t I &s;hould offend them both.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;eventh Argument. Some of them have expo&s;ed them&s;elves to more danger, and harder terms from the Adver&s;e Party, then ordinary (in ca&s;e they &s;hould prevail) by a publike vindication of the Cau&s;e of the Parliament in Print, from the Scriptures, and that before any man of differing judgement from them in Church-Affairs, appeared in the Cau&s;e, upon &s;uch
<PB N="178" REF="95">terms. <HI>Ergo,</HI> Men &s;o holy, &s;o harmle&s;&s;e, of &s;uch eminent de&s;ert in the Cau&s;e of Religion, State, and Kingdom, &s;hould be <HI>tolerated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. But what a Braggadochio is this? Its pitty, but he had been a <HI>Spaniard;</HI> What is there in all the&s;e Arguments, but bragging, boa&s;ting, vaunting, and proud, and odious compari&s;ons? I will &s;ay nothing here of this Sect, yet mu&s;t I &s;ay of this <HI>M. S.</HI> and the re&s;t of the Ring-leaders of it, That I have never read of any Divines &s;o &s;elf-conceited. 2. No man can &s;ay, that any of the&s;e Arguments have any other <HI>medium</HI> or <HI>ground,</HI> &s;ave <HI>pride,</HI> and <HI>&s;elf-conceit:</HI> It is for ought, we know, or that appeareth in writing, the like&s;t to <HI>Lucifers,</HI> that ever we &s;aw. 3. If &s;uch cracking merit any An&s;wer at all, the Antecedent is notoriou&s;ly fal&s;e; for the <HI>Scots</HI> appeared before that any of your Independents ever &s;hewed their Heads, yea, before that the Parliament was called here. Ma&s;ter <HI>Prynne</HI> al&s;o, who is no Independent, ap|peared from the beginning, and yet continues a man in Learning, Piety, and Reading, as I beleeve, inferiour to none of you all; as appeareth by his writing again&s;t Arminians, Epi&s;copacy, yea, and the Archb. of <HI>Canterbury,</HI> in the mo&s;t dangerous times, having put him down by Scripture, and invincible Arguments grounded thereupon; and afterwards by his Law, &s;o involved him in Premunires, that what ever Coun&s;ell he could take, he could never Extri|cate him&s;elf. Neither did he, as your pretended Martyrs, when he was in pri&s;on; he &s;corned to live upon other mens pur&s;es, or to make him&s;elf rich by his Martyrdom, in taking, what ever good Chri&s;tians could offer them; he was chargeable to no man; and yet I am a&s;&s;ured, as I am well informed, he might by his &s;ufferings have become rich: Neither &s;ay I this to flatter him, or to depre&s;&s;e you, (for I never frequented him much; neither, according to ordinary Providence, can I in time to come, have much to do with any of you) but to beat down that in&s;upportable and proud Argument of yours, grounded upon your <HI>merits</HI> of <HI>Supererogation.</HI> It would &s;eem by your Di&s;cour&s;e, that neither Heaven, nor Earth, is &s;ufficient to recompence &s;o de&s;erving men. 4. I deny the Con&s;equence; for your Sect is not to be <HI>tolerated</HI> for any &s;ervice you have done to the State, if it be not <HI>conform</HI> to <HI>Gods Word.</HI> 1. For Ile warrant you, if Jews could obtain &s;uch a <HI>Toleration,</HI> as ye aym at, they would appear upon the &s;ame terms, as you do. 2. And the Popi&s;h Rebels of <HI>Ireland</HI> propound the &s;ame Argument to the Kings Maje&s;ty, that ye propound here. 5. They deal a great deal fairer, who pre&s;&s;e every man to keep his <HI>Covenant</HI> with God; in pulling down of <HI>Popery, Arminiani&s;m,</HI> all <HI>Sects</HI> and <HI>Here&s;ies,</HI> according to their &s;olemn <HI>Oath,</HI> for a <HI>Toleration</HI> whereof you are here a &s;uiter, again&s;t your <HI>Oath. Ergo,</HI> I will &s;ay nothing but this, That it is ju&s;t with God, that he never <HI>tolerate</HI> them, who will <HI>tolerate</HI> &s;o <HI>many Sects,</HI> to di&s;honour him: As for my &s;elf, if all the World &s;hould &s;ub&s;cribe &s;uch an <HI>Oath,</HI> I hope in <HI>Gods Mercy,</HI> I &s;hould never be drawn to &s;ub&s;cribe it: 7. Neither think I, that any man can do it, without <HI>perjury,</HI> and manife&s;t breach of that <HI>&s;olemn Cove|nant,</HI>
<PB N="179" REF="95">already entred into. The Lord pre&s;erve us from playing thus fa&s;t, and loo&s;e with <HI>Oaths.</HI> 8. If &s;uch a <HI>Toleration</HI> of <HI>all Sects,</HI> which this man di&s;|putes &s;o hard for, were granted, what could it be, but the utter di&s;honour of this Parliament, the Church of God, and all the three Kingdoms? 9. Should not the Je&s;uites have ju&s;t &s;ubject to jeer at all the Books we have formerly writ|ten again&s;t their Equivocations, if we our &s;elves &s;hould &s;o equivocate with the living God? 10. Should we not ju&s;tifie the <HI>Bi&s;hops,</HI> who have &s;o calum|niated, and cryed down the Parliament, for <HI>bringing in, and tolerating of &s;o many Sects and Here&s;ies, Tub-Preaching? &amp;c.</HI> 11. Is the <HI>Religion</HI> of <HI>Oxford,</HI> yea, of the Rebels of <HI>Ireland,</HI> wor&s;e then this? 12. What had we to do to undergo &s;uch a War again&s;t the Malignants, if we were minded to <HI>tolerate</HI> all the <HI>Religions,</HI> we now fight again&s;t? yea, and many others ten times wor&s;e? What were that, but to &s;hew our &s;elves more Malignants then they are? yea, to declare them ju&s;t, and our &s;elves, perfidious Rebels? Sure he, that would &s;ub|&s;cribe &s;uch a <HI>Toleration,</HI> mu&s;t be out of his wits, wor&s;e then a Papi&s;t, yea, then a Pagan. 13. Neither know we any &s;uch <HI>Toleration,</HI> but among&s;t the Turks, who yet <HI>tolerate</HI> no man to &s;peak again&s;t <HI>Mahumet.</HI> 14. And I mu&s;t &s;ay, that it were better living among&s;t the Turks, then among&s;t &s;uch Chri&s;tians; for the le&s;&s;e their light is, the more excu&s;eable are they; and the greater ours, the greater is our &s;in, and the more inexcu&s;eable are we. 15. And if the <HI>Parliament</HI> &s;hould follow your Coun&s;ell, good <HI>M. S.</HI> it &s;hould be to be feared, they &s;hould be ill obeyed, and that many good men would rather take the <HI>Bi&s;hops</HI> and <HI>Cavaliers</HI> by the hand; and in ca&s;e of nece&s;&s;ity, <HI>tolerate</HI> them both, and let them&s;elves be plundered, then con&s;ent to &s;uch an abominable <HI>perjury;</HI> and I am a&s;&s;ured, the one is much more tolerable, then the other is; and then what &s;hould become of the <HI>Parliament,</HI> and us all? 16. But tell me, I pray thee, <HI>M. S.</HI> Is it not a <HI>Maxime</HI> of <HI>State,</HI> laid down, as indubitable by tho&s;e, who have written in favour of the&s;e <HI>Defen&s;ive Wars</HI> of both the <HI>King|doms,</HI> That the <HI>King</HI> in Temporall and Civill Matters hath not an <HI>ab&s;olute,</HI> but a <HI>limitted Power,</HI> and that becau&s;e, that <HI>Soveraign Power</HI> is originally in the People, but <HI>&s;ubjectiv&egrave;,</HI> or <HI>quoad u&s;um, &amp; exercitium</HI> in the <HI>King.</HI> If that hold in the <HI>King,</HI> wherefore not al&s;o in the <HI>Parliament?</HI> But how much more in matters of <HI>Religion,</HI> that depend not either of <HI>King,</HI> or <HI>Parliament;</HI> but of <HI>Gods Will?</HI> All power here, is <HI>originally in Chri&s;t,</HI> and <HI>quoad exercitium Mini&s;teriale</HI> in his <HI>Officers,</HI> but from <HI>Chri&s;t.</HI> What Power hath either <HI>King</HI> or <HI>Parliament,</HI> to intrude and force upon the <HI>Kingdom</HI> new <HI>Religions,</HI> or a <HI>Toleration</HI> of all <HI>Sects?</HI> 17. The <HI>Parliament</HI> a&s;&s;umes no &s;uch power to it &s;elf; wherefore then will Independents be Suiters to them for any &s;uch things, which they declare them&s;elves, they have not power to grant? Away with thee, <HI>M. S.</HI> and all thy Independent Sect, and all your unhappy Maximes of State, &s;o pernitious to all States of the World.</P>
<PB N="180" REF="96">
<P>After all this, this <HI>M. S.</HI> telleth us, that they will, with <HI>I&s;aac,</HI> patiently &s;uffer them&s;elves to be bound, and offered in Sacrifice, if need be.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> It is ea&s;ie to offer your &s;elves to be Sacrificed, when there is no Prie&s;t, and when no man offers you any violence, but onely prayes you to live among&s;t us, as Brethren; and not to trouble the <HI>Church, State,</HI> or <HI>Kingdom:</HI> If you be minded to become &s;uch a Free-will-offering, in good earne&s;t, ye would do well all of you in the fir&s;t place, to quit the good fat Benefices ye have in the Church? But &s;o long as ye keep them, we cannot beleeve, that ye &s;peak &s;in|cerely: Alwayes, it is a pretty Compliment, and a <HI>painted Sacrifice,</HI> not with <HI>red,</HI> but <HI>in white and black.</HI></P>
<P>And to clo&s;e up his Rea&s;ons, he concludes thus; <HI>Better a thou&s;and times is it, that &s;uch di&s;tempers as the&s;e, though found in millions of men, &s;hould &s;uffer, were it never &s;o deep,</HI> then <HI>that the lea&s;t Hair of the Head, of one of tho&s;e men, &s;hould fall to the ground. i. e.</HI> Better that millions of us, who de&s;ire the &s;up|pre&s;&s;ion of all Sects, &s;hould &s;uffer, then that any of them &s;hould loo&s;e but one, yea, the lea&s;t Hair of their Head.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> To this I can &s;ay nothing; But if we in your Opinion, be &s;o <HI>di&s;tem|pered,</HI> for the <HI>de&s;ire</HI> we have to &s;ee <HI>Sects &s;uppre&s;&s;ed,</HI> whereby God is offended, the Lord be judge betwixt us; <HI>How precious in your eyes, one little Hair of your Head is,</HI> which ye prefer before the &s;ufferings of &s;o many millions, the Reader will do well to take it into his con&s;ideration, and accordingly to judge of you; what a high rate you &s;et by your &s;elves; and what an undervalue ye put upon all the World be&s;ides. I am a&s;&s;ured, that <HI>&s;ervat&acirc; proportione,</HI> one of your lives is better then the <HI>Kings,</HI> and all the <HI>Parliaments,</HI> put together; for there is none of them, but rather then that one man &s;hould dye, they would part with the Hair, of their Heads, and Beards both.</P>
</DIV2>
</DIV1>
</BODY>
<BACK>
<DIV1 TYPE="to the reader">
<PB N="181" REF="96">
<HEAD>AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER.</HEAD>
<P><HI>_M. S.</HI> in the &s;econd Chapter of his Book, Section 28. hath &s;ome Arguments again&s;t the Power of the Civill Magi&s;trate, to puni&s;h Idolaters, Heretiques, and Schi&s;matiques, which &s;eem al&s;o to make for a <HI>Toleration;</HI> for the&s;e two Que&s;tions have a great Affinity together: Wherefore I thought it fitte&s;t to put off my An&s;wer unto them, to the la&s;t place.</P>
<P>The fir&s;t is; God hath anointed his Word, and the Mini&s;tery thereof, <HI>For the ca&s;ting down imaginations, and every high thing, that exalts it &s;elf again&s;t the knowledge of God, and for the bringing into captivity, every high thought unto the Obedience of Chri&s;t,</HI> 2 <HI>Cor.</HI> 10.5. <HI>And he gave &s;ome to be Apo&s;tles,</HI> &amp;c. <HI>Ephe&s;.</HI> 4.11, 12. <HI>&amp;c. Ergo,</HI> The Civill Magi&s;trate hath no power to puni&s;h Heretiques, Schi&s;matiques, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> but mu&s;t <HI>tolerate</HI> them.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I deny the Con&s;equence; For the Mini&s;ters of the Church are <HI>anointed</HI> to beat them down by Spirituall means, <HI>viz.</HI> The Word, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> where|of alone tho&s;e Texts &s;peak: But the Civill Magi&s;trate is <HI>anointed,</HI> or called to beat them down by other means, <HI>viz.</HI> by Civill Power, and Civill Laws, which he is bound to make thereabouts, and to &s;ee ob&s;erved.</P>
<P N="2">2. If this Argument hold, the Civill Magi&s;trate cannot beat down, by his Civill Authority, Sins committed again&s;t the &s;econd Table, as Adultery, Mur|ther, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> becau&s;e, that the Mini&s;ters of God, in the Church, beat them down <HI>&s;piritually</HI> by the Word. And this Text is, as well to be under&s;tood of Sins again&s;t the one, as the other Table.</P>
<P N="3">3. How&s;oever, the power of the Mini&s;tery, or <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power</HI> be able and &s;ufficient to beat down all &s;in <HI>&s;piritually,</HI> yet is it not &s;ufficient, or able to beat it down <HI>politically.</HI></P>
<P N="4">4. Neither &s;ay the&s;e Texts, that God hath <HI>anointed,</HI> or ordained the <HI>Word,</HI> and <HI>Mini&s;tery</HI> alone, and no other means, or Mini&s;ters, as the Laws of the Kingdom and the Civill Magi&s;trate, in a Politicall way, for &s;uch an effect.</P>
<P N="5">5. It is true, as <HI>M. S.</HI> &s;ayes, that God <HI>gave</HI> not <HI>&s;ome</HI> in the <HI>Church,</HI> to be
<PB N="182" REF="97"><HI>Kings, Princes, Judges, and Ju&s;tices of Peace, Pur&s;evants, Jaylors,</HI> &amp;c. For Chri&s;t, and his Apo&s;tles erected not any Civill Government in the State, but &s;uppo&s;ed it already con&s;tituted in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament:</HI> And that the Civill Magi&s;trate therein, was endowed with Civill Authority, to puni&s;h &s;uch as trouble the Peace of the Church.</P>
<P N="6">6. Howbeit, that in this Text, there is no mention made of the Civill Ma|gi&s;trates Power to puni&s;h &s;uch per&s;ons; yet is it declared in other Texts, as <HI>Rom.</HI> 13.1. <HI>There is no power, but of God. Ergo,</HI> It is for God, &s;ince God is both the fir&s;t <HI>Efficient,</HI> and the la&s;t, or <HI>ultimate</HI> Finall Cau&s;e of all things, if he be for God. <HI>Ergo,</HI> He is to revenge his Cau&s;e, &s;ince he is his Mini&s;ter, <HI>Ver.</HI> 4. And when he maketh a Politicall Ordinance concerning Gods &s;ervice, <HI>Who|&s;oever re&s;i&s;teth his power, re&s;i&s;ts the Ordinance of God; and they that re&s;i&s;t, &s;hall receive to them&s;elvet condemnation,</HI> both eternall and temporall, <HI>Ver&s;.</HI> 2. <HI>if thou do that which is evill, be afraid, for he beareth not the &s;word in vain, for he is the Mini&s;ter of God,</HI> as well in the State, as the Preacher in the Church, <HI>a revenger to execute wrath upon him, that doth evill:</HI> Here there is no di&s;tinction or re&s;triction in the Law. <HI>Ergo,</HI> It is not for us, to di&s;tingui&s;h, or re&s;train it: <HI>He is the Mini&s;ter of God for good, Ver&s;.</HI> 4. <HI>Ergo,</HI> For this good, <HI>viz.</HI> to have a care of <HI>Religion,</HI> and to puni&s;h &s;uch, as trouble it by their Schi&s;ms, and Here&s;ies.</P>
<P>And therefore, 6. I deny the Con&s;equence; For <HI>Po&s;ito uno Medio, non ne|gantur reliqua;</HI> It followeth not, That if God &s;erve him&s;elf of &s;ome means in the Church: <HI>Ergo,</HI> He &s;erveth him&s;elf, of any other means, <HI>viz.</HI> of Civill Authority about the Church, and out of the Church: That were, as if I &s;hould &s;ay; The <HI>internall Cau&s;es,</HI> as <HI>Materia &amp; Forma,</HI> are nece&s;&s;ary to the Generation of a man; <HI>Ergo,</HI> The <HI>Externall,</HI> as the <HI>Efficient</HI> and <HI>Finall, viz.</HI> God and man are not nece&s;&s;ary.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 2. The Mini&s;ters of the Church mu&s;t perform their Office with meekne&s;&s;e, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.24. <HI>Ergo,</HI> They mu&s;t not threaten men with delivering them over to the Civill Magi&s;trate.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer to the Antecedent; They mu&s;t perform their duty, not one|ly with meekne&s;&s;e; but al&s;o with &s;everity, when nece&s;&s;ity requireth it, as we &s;ee in Saint <HI>Paul.</HI> 2. The Text, 2 <HI>Tim.</HI> 2.24. &s;peaketh onely of <HI>meekne&s;&s;e</HI> in teaching; <HI>In meekne&s;&s;e</HI> (&s;aith the Apo&s;tle) <HI>in&s;tructing tho&s;e that oppo&s;e them|&s;elves, if peradventure God will give them repentance.</HI> 3. It onely &s;aith, that they mu&s;t u&s;e <HI>meekne&s;&s;e,</HI> when men are docilo; when there is any hope of Repentance; and not with pertinacious Heretiques, and Schi&s;matiques, of whom we cannot expect Repentance. 4. I deny the Con&s;equence; When the Mini&s;ters of the Church threaten them, to deliver them over unto the Civill Magi&s;trate, they may do that al&s;o with <HI>meekne&s;&s;e:</HI> Neither is &s;uch a proceed|ing contrary to <HI>meekne&s;&s;e;</HI> for the <HI>meeke&s;t</HI> man of the World may accu&s;e his Party before the Civill Magi&s;trate; and yet not be thought inhumane, or
<PB N="183" REF="97">cruell. 5. Thus, All being beaten down, all that he builds upon this ruinous Foundation, mu&s;t needs fall to ground.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his third Rea&s;on: That which is a &s;peciall gift of God, and whereof no man is capable, by his own indu&s;try, the want of it (being in it &s;elf a judgement of God, and withall, no wayes prejudiciall, or hurtfull unto o|thers) &s;hould not expo&s;e him to further puni&s;hment and mi&s;ery: But <HI>Repen|tance to the acknowledgement of the Truth,</HI> is a &s;peciall gift of God, and the want thereof, a judgement of God; <HI>&amp;c. Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I deny the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition; For if he be bound to have it, and had the faculty, and &s;ufficient means to have had it, and to keep it after that he had it, or might have it; and if by his own fault he want it, he cannot ex|cu&s;e him&s;elf neither from the Obligation to have, nor from the Puni&s;hment due to him for the want of it, as our Divines teach again&s;t the Arminians.</P>
<P N="2">2. I deny the A&s;&s;umption; for it is prejudiciall to others, by the ill example he gives, and by the malice proceeding from thence, that induces others to the &s;ame &s;in, to fal&s;e Doctrines, Schi&s;ms, and Here&s;ies.</P>
<P N="3">3. This Argument proveth not <HI>M. S.</HI> his <HI>The&s;is, viz.</HI> That the Civill Magi|&s;trate &s;hould not puni&s;h Heretiques and Schi&s;matiques, or that they &s;hould be <HI>tolerated</HI> in the State.</P>
<P>And therefore, 4. we may grant him all the Argument. Neither doth the Civill Magi&s;trate puni&s;h any man for want of Repentance, or for his igno|rance, which are in the minde and will, and con&s;equently unknown to him; but for the pertinacious Externall Profe&s;&s;ion of them; in &s;o far forth, as they trouble the peace of the Church, and the State. Neither refu&s;eth he to <HI>tolerate</HI> ignorance, or want of repentance; yea, if there be nothing wor&s;e in them, both the Civill Magi&s;trate, and the Mini&s;ters of Chri&s;t, mu&s;t pitty them, and travell for their in&s;truction and amendment. This is far from proving either a <HI>Toleration</HI> of the Publike Exerci&s;e of Hereticall Doctrines, or of Schi&s;ms, or that the Civill Magi&s;trate hath not power to puni&s;h them.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his fourth Rea&s;on being put in Form, will be thus; That which maketh men wor&s;e, and Hypocrites, to profe&s;&s;e outwardly, what they beleeve not in their Con&s;ciences, is not lawfull: But Externall Compul&s;ion of Here|ticks, Schi&s;maticks, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in matters of Religion, made by the Civill Magi|&s;trate, is &s;uch: <HI>Ergo,</HI> It is unlawfull, and con&s;equently not to be <HI>tolerated.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer to the fir&s;t Propo&s;ition; If it make men wor&s;e <HI>per Accidens,</HI> not of it &s;elf, but in vertue of &s;ome Accident, annexed to the per&s;on, that be|cometh wor&s;e; it is fal&s;e: If it do it <HI>per &s;e,</HI> by its <HI>own vertue, and efficacy;</HI> it is true: But then the A&s;&s;umption is fal&s;e; for the Civill Magi&s;trate, in puni&s;hing Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> maketh them not wor&s;e <HI>per &s;e;</HI> for neither is it <HI>finis Operantis,</HI> or <HI>Operationis;</HI> &s;ince neither he intends to make them wor&s;e, but better; nor tends his Operation; <HI>i. e.</HI> his Iudgement and Command to make them at all ill, much le&s;&s;e to make them wor&s;e; &s;ince the
<PB N="184" REF="98">effect of it <HI>per &s;e</HI> is onely to impri&s;on their bodies, to fine them, or, if they merit it, to exile them, or take their lives; which produceth no morall ill, but a great good, <HI>viz.</HI> a hinderance of them to vent abroad their Here&s;ies and Schi&s;ms. So it maketh them not Hypocrites <HI>per &s;e;</HI> but onely they <HI>per &s;e</HI> make them&s;elves Hypocrites: They are bound to &s;uffer them&s;elves to be taught the Truth, &s;o to beleeve it, and &s;o they &s;hall not be Hypocrites.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> replieth, That he &s;tands already engaged in a greater band hereun|to, <HI>viz.</HI> His peace with God, and the &s;afety of his Soul, then &s;uffering tem|porally from the Civill Power.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> Your erroneous Con&s;cience can breed no true, and reall Obligation, or Engagement again&s;t God: 1. For you are bound, and obliged to God to ca&s;t away your Ignorance, and ill Con&s;cience: 2. What if your Erroneous Con&s;cience dictate you, that you mu&s;t kill the King, as that of <HI>Ravalliack</HI> did to him in <HI>France,</HI> to kill <HI>Henry</HI> the fourth; and that of the Je&s;uites and Prie&s;ts in <HI>England</HI> did them, to blow up the Parliament, and many Papi&s;ts of their own Religion; Mu&s;t you I pray, obey the dictate of &s;uch a Con&s;cience? 3. Away with &s;uch wicked Con&s;ciences; and <HI>to the Law, and Prophets,</HI> if you be a Prote&s;tant. 4. Either that <HI>band</HI> is laid upon you by God, or the Devill: But it cannot be laid upon you by God; for he cannot lay a <HI>band</HI> upon you, to &s;erve the Devill, or to de&s;pight him&s;elf, for &s;o he &s;hould be the Author of &s;in; nor by the Devill; for then the <HI>band</HI> laid upon you to &s;erve him, &s;hould be greater then that, which God hath laid upon you in his Word, to &s;erve him.</P>
<P>It may be &s;aid, That &s;o long as my Erroneous Con&s;cience la&s;teth, I mu&s;t obey it.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer, you mu&s;t obey it, as he, who is captive under &s;in, mu&s;t obey &s;in, being a &s;lave unto &s;in, that hath voluntarily rendered him &s;uch; but he unju&s;tly rendered him&s;elf a &s;lave to &s;in, and unju&s;tly, in vertue thereof, re|maineth a &s;inner, and obeyeth it.</P>
<P>Some will An&s;wer, 7. That <HI>Con&s;cientia erronea ligat, &s;ed non obligat,</HI> an erroneous Con&s;cience bindes a man &s;o up, that it hindereth him to do the good, but it obliges him not to do the ill, that it dictateth.</P>
<P>Neither is this the Que&s;tion, Whether an Heretick is bound to beleeve what the Magi&s;trate willeth him to beleeve; But whether he &s;hould have power to erect Churches again&s;t the Orthodox Religion, as the Independents would; And whether, or no, the Civill Magi&s;trate can hinder him by his Civill Power, from &s;o doing. Now the Argument proveth not the Negative part; neither doth the Civill Magi&s;trate compell private men to <HI>beleeve,</HI> but <HI>not</HI> to <HI>trouble</HI> the <HI>peace</HI> of the <HI>Church,</HI> in &s;etting up of others without his per|mi&s;&s;ion.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his fifth Rea&s;on; If the Civill Magi&s;trate hath an actuall Coercive power to &s;uppre&s;&s;e Schi&s;ms and Here&s;ies, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> becau&s;e he is truely a Chri&s;tian;
<PB N="185" REF="98">then Chri&s;tianity changeth the propertie, and tenour of his Magi&s;tracy, and that for the wor&s;e; for in vertue thereof he acquireth a power to cru&s;h his Subjects for the exerci&s;e of their Con&s;cience, yea, to per&s;ecute the Saints, which he had not before; If &s;o, Chri&s;tians have little rea&s;on to pray for his Conver&s;ion: But the Con&s;equent is fal&s;e. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. I deny the Con&s;equence of the Propo&s;ition; for both the Chri&s;tian and Unchri&s;tian Magi&s;trate have the actuall Coercive power, how|beit, they have not both actually the act of that Power; for both the one, and the other, hath that Morall power <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> or the Remote power; but the Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate onely hath it <HI>in actu exercito, i. e.</HI> The immediate Authority to exerci&s;e it, becau&s;e he hath, or &s;hould have, or is &s;uppo&s;ed morally to have all things requi&s;ite to the exerci&s;e thereof: So is it not in a Pagan; for he hath not the knowledge of the Go&s;pel, whereby he &s;hould exerci&s;e it, nor the will to exerci&s;e it ju&s;tly, which is pre&s;uppo&s;ed to it: &s;o he hath, as it were, <HI>pote&s;tatem, &s;ed caret u&s;u pote&s;tatis,</HI> as a Childe, that hath a rea&s;onable Soul, and all the rea&s;onable Faculties, that a man hath, but he hath not the u&s;e of Rea&s;on, or of tho&s;e rea&s;onable Faculties; he hath <HI>facultatem, qua&s;i ligatam,</HI> as he, who cannot &s;ee for a tye that he hath in his eye. 2. I deny that Chri&s;tianity changeth his power to wor&s;e; for it is not, as you &s;ay, to cru&s;h good, but to mend and reform ignorant, and ill men, and to cha&s;ti&s;e them, <HI>Nulla enim potentia ad malum,</HI> the Apo&s;tle telleth you, that he is the <HI>Mini&s;ter of God to thee for good, Rom.</HI> 3.4. <HI>Rulers are not a terrour to good works. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the Power? Do that which is good, Ver&s;.</HI> 3.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> his &s;ixth Argument. That power is very dangerous to a Magi&s;trate to own, in the exerci&s;e whereof, he may very ea&s;ily run an hazard (at lea&s;t) <HI>in fighting again&s;t God,</HI> or in <HI>plucking up</HI> that, which God hath <HI>planted,</HI> or in pulling down that, which God hath <HI>built.</HI> But &s;uch is that power of &s;uppre&s;|&s;ing Schi&s;ms, Here&s;ies, <HI>&amp;c. Ergo.</HI></P>
<P>The A&s;&s;umption, he proveth it, becau&s;e the Opinions that he &s;ees by other mens eyes to be &s;chi&s;maticall, may be the wayes of God. 1. Becau&s;e the judgements of the&s;e men are not Apo&s;tolicall. 2. Frequent experience &s;hews, that a Minor part, yea, an incon&s;iderable number of godly Per&s;ons in a Church, may have the minde of God in &s;ome particularities, before the Major part have it. 3. It &s;eldom, or never falleth out, that any truth, which hath for a long time been under Hatches, and unknown to the generality of Mini&s;ters in a Church, hath been at the fir&s;t, and on the &s;udden revealed, either to the Generality, or to the Major part of them. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer, 1. to the fir&s;t; It is no more dangerous, then the Magi|&s;tracy it &s;elf: &s;o as if it be dangerous to own the Magi&s;tracy; &s;o is it likewi&s;e to own that part of it, whereby, in vertue of his Civill Power, he ruleth the Church civilly; and &s;o all the Argument may be granted; and the greater that
<PB N="186" REF="99">the danger is to own it, the greater a great deal &s;hould his circum&s;pection be. 2. If this Argument hold, it will conclude no le&s;&s;e again&s;t the Civill, and Eccle|&s;ia&s;ticall Government of the Old Te&s;tament, and that of the Civill Magi&s;trate of <HI>New England</HI> al&s;o. 3. I may deny the Major; for if he accept of the Magi|&s;tracy, it is a far greater danger not to accept this part of the charge; for there is a nece&s;&s;ity laid upon him in vertue of the Magi&s;tracy, to accept it, as the principall part thereof. 4. The greater that the danger and difficulty be, &s;o much the greater is the vertue in exerci&s;ing of it, and the greater will the retribution be for it. 5. It is not very dangerous to own the <HI>charge,</HI> but not to <HI>exerci&s;e</HI> it <HI>faithfully.</HI> 6. To the A&s;&s;umption I An&s;wer, That it is but one of <HI>M. S.</HI> his <HI>may be's, quod nihil ponit in re;</HI> The Confirmations of it al&s;o contain but <HI>may be's.</HI></P>
<P>Their <HI>judgements</HI> I grant you, are not <HI>Apo&s;tolicall:</HI> 1. But no more are the <HI>judgements</HI> of your <HI>particular Congregations.</HI> 2. Or tho&s;e of the <HI>King</HI> and <HI>Parliament,</HI> or of any mortall men, at lea&s;t ordinarily, and yet notwith|&s;tanding they are lawfull. 3. Neither is it needfull, that they be infallible, but without fault onely.</P>
<P>To the &s;econd proof. 1. It is but a <HI>may be,</HI> which yet <HI>may not be.</HI> 2. And it is extraordinary. 3. And howbeit it were &s;o ordinarily, yet followeth it not, that your Independents are &s;uch. 4. If it were &s;o, Gods truth Ordi|narily &s;hould not prevail. 5. All Schi&s;maticks and Hereticks, who are few in number, may &s;ay as much; So Mi&s;tre&s;&s;e <HI>Hutchin&s;on</HI> in <HI>New England,</HI> Ile warrant you, &s;aid no le&s;&s;e.</P>
<P>To the third. 1. I deny, that the truth, whereof we di&s;pute, hath been <HI>under the Hatches,</HI> as ye pretend. 2. All Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks &s;ay the &s;ame. 3. And in all the&s;e his Rea&s;ons, he argueth evermore <HI>a facto ad jus,</HI> from the Fact to the Law; and from that which is, to that which &s;hould be; and from that which may be, to that which is. The Authority of <HI>Gamaliel, Act.</HI> 4. is but of a prophane Politician, who would rule the Church and Religion, ac|cording to Politicall Ends.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 7. Rea&s;on. That Power, which was never attributed to the Civill Magi&s;trate, by any Chri&s;tians, but onely by tho&s;e that had very good a&s;&s;urance, that it &s;hould be u&s;ed for them, appertaineth not to him by divine right. But that Coercive Power in matters of <HI>Religion,</HI> for the &s;uppre&s;&s;ing of Errours, Schi&s;ms, Here&s;ies, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> was never attributed to the Civill Magi&s;trate, by any Chri&s;tian, but onely by tho&s;e, that had very good a&s;&s;urance, that it &s;hould be u&s;ed for them. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer; That if the word <HI>Power</HI> in the Major, and Minor be taken for an <HI>Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall Power,</HI> which is <HI>intrin&s;ecall</HI> to the Church, I grant you all the Argument; neither concludes it any thing again&s;t us: But if it be taken for a <HI>Politicall Power,</HI> that is <HI>extrin&s;ecall</HI> to the Church, whereby he puni&s;hes Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks, by Civill puni&s;hments, the Minor is fal&s;e, as I have already &s;hewed by my Arguments; And what he &s;aith of my
<PB N="187" REF="99">tenderne&s;&s;e, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> it is but Language in&s;tead of Rea&s;ons. 2. If the <HI>Extrin&s;e|call power</HI> be taken for a <HI>remote power,</HI> or <HI>in actu &s;ignato,</HI> the <HI>Minor</HI> is fal&s;e; neither proveth he it; but we have proved the contrary; for both Pagans, and Chri&s;tians have it: If it be taken for a <HI>neerer Immediate power,</HI> or <HI>in actu exercito,</HI> the <HI>Minor</HI> is true of the <HI>&V;nchri&s;tian,</HI> but fal&s;e of the <HI>Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate,</HI> as I have told you again, and again, and proved it. 3. But is not this <HI>Power</HI> granted to the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate,</HI> by the <HI>Chri&s;tians</HI> of <HI>New England?</HI> 4. And was it not granted him in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament?</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 8. Argument. The exerci&s;e of a <HI>Coactive power</HI> of the <HI>Civill Magi|&s;trate,</HI> again&s;t Hereticks, Schi&s;maticks, <HI>&amp;c.</HI> in matters of Religion, tends directly to prevent, hinder, or &s;uppre&s;&s;e, the growth of the Knowledge of God, and Je&s;us Chri&s;t, in the Church, and State, and the Reformation of Doctrine, and Di&s;cipline. <HI>Ergo,</HI> It is not of Divine In&s;titution.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I an&s;wer, 1. I deny the Antecedent, or I di&s;tingui&s;h it; if it do all that <HI>per accidens,</HI> I deny the Con&s;equence; if <HI>per &s;e,</HI> the Antecedent is fal&s;e.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> proveth his A&s;&s;umption in &s;ub&s;tance thus: When the Civill Magi&s;trate holds any thing in Religion, it is a great temptation, and di&s;|couragement upon the Subject, to &s;earch out the Truth in Scripture; for if he finde it, again&s;t the Tenets of the Civill Magi&s;trate, one of two things mu&s;t follow. Either out of fear of puni&s;hment, he withholdeth the truth in un|righteou&s;ne&s;&s;e; and &s;o hath God and his own Con&s;cience, for his Enemy; or el&s;e he profe&s;&s;eth it; and &s;o hath his bones broken for it: So the&s;e two dangers may tempt him not to read the Scripture.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. This proveth not that thing which is denyed. 2. I deny that the power of the Civill Magi&s;trate, &s;ince it is onely to good, <HI>Rom.</HI> 13. can <HI>per &s;e</HI> cau&s;e any &s;uch Temptation. 3. Howbeit, a man di&s;cover any Truth in Scripture again&s;t the Tenets of the Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate, that he needs to fear any &s;uch thing; for the true Chri&s;tian Magi&s;trate will not be &s;o barbarous again&s;t the Truth, howbeit he think it to be an errour; for he may be curi|ous to learn it; and if he that hath found it, be prudent and not turbulent, he needs not to &s;uffer for it.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 9. Argument; The exerci&s;e of a Coactive power in matters of Re|ligion, which <HI>A. S.</HI> and many others, pin upon the Civill Magi&s;trate, tends to the gratification of Satan, and of carnall and prophane men: <HI>Ergo,</HI> It is not of God.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> I deny the Antecedent; for then it &s;hould be a gratification of Satan, to puni&s;h Hereticks and Schi&s;maticks; and &s;o to de&s;troy his Kingdom, which is mainly up held by them.</P>
<P>But <HI>M. S.</HI> proveth it, 1. For many of tho&s;e, that are like to &s;uffer by it, are men of good Con&s;cience, and truly fearing God, as the Apologi&s;ts, and men of their Iudgement.</P>
<PB N="188" REF="100">
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. We &s;ee no appearance, that tho&s;e your <HI>men of good con&s;cience</HI> are like to <HI>&s;uffer,</HI> how&s;oever they have very highly offended again&s;t the <HI>Civill Ma|gi&s;trates Authority;</HI> and &s;ome of you, as one <HI>M. S.</HI> in the fir&s;t Edition of his Book, writes, that the name of <HI>Steuart</HI> hath been <HI>fune&s;t</HI> to <HI>England,</HI> in King <HI>James,</HI> and King <HI>Charls.</HI></P>
<P N="2">2. If they <HI>&s;uffer,</HI> Ile warrant you it will never be for their good Con&s;ci|ence, but for &s;ome wor&s;e thing.</P>
<P>Again, <HI>M. S.</HI> for fear that we &s;hould deny them to be <HI>men</HI> of <HI>good Con&s;cience,</HI> proveth it by two Rea&s;ons.</P>
<LIST>
<ITEM>1. Becau&s;e <HI>A. S.</HI> confe&s;&s;ed it: But this hath been &s;undry times an&s;wered.</ITEM>
<ITEM>2. Becau&s;e it is not ordinary, that men of <HI>loo&s;e,</HI> or <HI>no Con&s;cience,</HI> &s;hould de|light to <HI>&s;wim again&s;t the &s;treams</HI> of <HI>greatne&s;&s;e</HI> or <HI>pluralitie</HI> in matters of Religion.</ITEM>
</LIST>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> But the Devill hath his own Martyrs, as God hath his: And one <HI>Vaninus,</HI> an Athei&s;t in <HI>France,</HI> cho&s;e rather to die, then to renounce his A|thei&s;m; and &s;o was drowned for his thus <HI>&s;wiming again&s;t the &s;treams of great|ne&s;&s;e and plurality.</HI></P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> proveth the &s;econd part of the A&s;&s;umption, <HI>viz.</HI> That &s;uch a Civill Power in the Civill Magi&s;trate, about matters of Religion, is a gratification of ignorant and carnall men; becau&s;e they de&s;ire alwayes, Sects, and Opi|nions in Religion to be &s;uppre&s;&s;ed, &s;ave onely that, which &s;hall be authorized and practi&s;ed in the State; for &s;o they &s;hall not be much troubled to &s;eek it, they know not where, or among&s;t whom.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> 1. And if the <HI>true Religion</HI> be to be <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hed</HI> in the <HI>State,</HI> where|fore are they not to be gratified therein? What greater crime is it in them, then in good men, to de&s;ire the <HI>true Religion</HI> to be <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hed</HI> in the <HI>State;</HI> and all <HI>Sects</HI> and <HI>Here&s;ies</HI> to be <HI>&s;uppre&s;&s;ed?</HI> 2. Are they <HI>ignorant</HI> and <HI>carnall,</HI> who de&s;ire <HI>one onely,</HI> and that the <HI>true Religion</HI> to be <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hed;</HI> and <HI>they onely learned,</HI> and <HI>&s;pirituall,</HI> that de&s;ire <HI>many Sects,</HI> and <HI>Here&s;ies,</HI> whereby the good Name of God is bla&s;phemed, to &s;ub&s;i&s;t? 3. If that be ill; I am affraid the next word will be, that you will &s;ay, God did not well in <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hing</HI> the <HI>true Religion</HI> among&s;t his people, and in <HI>&s;uppre&s;&s;ing</HI> of <HI>Sects.</HI> 4. And no better do your <HI>Independents</HI> in <HI>New England,</HI> in <HI>&s;uppre&s;&s;ing</HI> of all <HI>Sects,</HI> &s;ave their own. If this be a crime, I pray God we be all criminall, and that God have no greater crime to charge us with. 5. But de&s;ire you, <HI>M. S.</HI> to have many <HI>Sects</HI> and <HI>Here&s;ies</HI> in the Kingdom, to &s;hew your great Learning in refuting of them, as the Souldiers would have the War to continue, to &s;hew their valour, and therein to finde their preferment? I pray you not to be offended with us, if we de&s;ire to be <HI>gratified with the mo&s;t ignorant,</HI> in <HI>&s;uppre&s;&s;ing</HI> them, and in <HI>e&s;tabli&s;hing</HI> the <HI>true Religion:</HI> So the <HI>Parliament</HI> and <HI>Synod</HI> are <HI>igno|rant,</HI> for this is their de&s;ire.</P>
<P><HI>M. S.</HI> 10. Argument. That power, which in the u&s;e of it, directly tends
<PB N="189" REF="100">to defile the Con&s;cience of men is, a power from beneath, and not from above.</P>
<P>But &s;uch is the Coercive power in matters of Religion, wherewith <HI>A. S.</HI> would fain befriend him&s;elf with the Civill Magi&s;trate. <HI>Ergo.</HI></P>
<P>The Major, I grant it. The A&s;&s;umption, if it have any &s;en&s;e, is this in &s;ub&s;tance: When a man is deeply threatned, in ca&s;e he &s;hall not comply with the State, in their Religion, again&s;t his Con&s;cience, 1. Either God leaves &s;uch a mans Con&s;cience to it &s;elf, and it is hardned; 2. Or by reflecting upon what it hath done, it brings it &s;elf into grievous Agonies, of which, it never recovers afterward.</P>
<P><HI>A. S.</HI> This is a very &s;trange Ca&s;e of Con&s;cience, <HI>viz.</HI> That <HI>M. S.</HI> his, and &s;uch like Independent Con&s;ciences, are &s;o tender and delicate, that they are &s;orely wounded, if they may not have a liberty to become Hereticall, and go to the Devill.</P>
<P>But I an&s;wer, 1. The A&s;&s;umption is fal&s;e; for the <HI>Externall Coactive Power,</HI> that <HI>A. S.</HI> grants unto the Civill Magi&s;trate, is onely to repre&s;&s;e Hereticks, and Schi&s;maticks, after that they are &s;ufficiently convicted by the Church, in an ordinary way; or by others, in an extraordinary way, when the Church is negligent in her duty.</P>
<P N="2">2. Neither doth <HI>M. S.</HI> his Confirmation, or Ca&s;e of Con&s;cience conclude any thing again&s;t that, which <HI>A. S.</HI> &s;ayes: And as for his Suppo&s;ition, either that Con&s;cience, whereof he &s;peaketh, is <HI>right,</HI> or <HI>erroneous:</HI> If it be <HI>right;</HI> the Civill Magi&s;trate &s;hould not pre&s;&s;e it again&s;t its light; or if he happen to do &s;o, it is not by Power, but by abu&s;e of Power; And in &s;uch a ca&s;e, he, who hath his Con&s;cience well informed, mu&s;t re&s;olve him&s;elf to be quiet, in ca&s;e the Civill Magi&s;trate oblige him not to be Actor in any thing again&s;t it: But if &s;uch a man, any other, or others with him, will ri&s;e up within the Kingdom, or come from Forraign Countries, and urge their Re|ligion upon the State, and e&s;tabli&s;h it, without permi&s;&s;ion of the Magi&s;trate, or again&s;t his Laws, then their Con&s;ciences cannot be <HI>right;</HI> for wherefore &s;hould the King, Parliament, and State, be rather bound to admit &s;uch mens Religion, without &s;ufficient conviction, then they to admit his Religion? And in &s;uch a Ca&s;e, the Civill Magi&s;trate, &s;o long as &s;uch per&s;ons as urge their Religion upon him, convict not &s;ufficiently his Con&s;cience, may with a good Con&s;cience puni&s;h them &s;everely, yea, with good Con&s;cience cut off their Heads. If &s;uch a mans Con&s;cience be erroneous, the Civill Magi&s;trate doth him no wrong to endeavour, that he, who hath it, be &s;ufficiently con|victed; and, if after &s;ufficient conviction, he will not be quiet, (e&s;pecially, when he is not obliged to be Actor in any thing again&s;t his pretended Con|&s;cience) but will &s;till trouble both Church, and State; wherefore, on Gods Name &s;hould he not be puni&s;hed? 2. Is it not better, that &s;uch a man &s;hould peri&s;h, then that he &s;hould make thou&s;ands to peri&s;h? 3. <HI>Ravalliack</HI> in
<PB N="190" REF="101"><HI>France,</HI> and the Monks, and Fryers, that kill Kings, pretend evermore Con|&s;cience, as the Independents do; and yet the Civill Magi&s;trate puts them to death. 4. If any mans Con&s;cience, (which God forbid) &s;hould dictate him to kill the King, and blow up the Parliament, &s;hould &s;uch a man be tolerated, under pretext of his tender Con&s;cience? 5. Is it not a &s;in to have an erro|neous Con&s;cience? And is not he, that hath it, bound to reform it, and to &s;uffer for it, in ca&s;e he reform it not, when he hath &s;ufficient means to do it? 6. But mu&s;t every man, that doth ill, be pre&s;ently believed, when he &s;aith, that he hath &s;uch a Con&s;cience? 7. All this long Sermon of <HI>M. S.</HI> proveth not, that the Magi&s;trate <HI>directly,</HI> and <HI>per &s;e,</HI> but rather that the man him&s;elf hardeneth his own Con&s;cience; for there is no created Power, that <HI>directly, per &s;e,</HI> and <HI>Phy&s;ically,</HI> can work upon a mans Con&s;cience; it can onely move it <HI>morally,</HI> in propounding of Objects to it, or in Rea&s;oning; and yet every true <HI>Chri&s;tian</HI> hath a &s;ufficient power to re&s;i&s;t &s;uch motions, which is &s;ufficient to make him in-excu&s;able. 8. Neither can his erroneous Con&s;ci|ence excu&s;e him, unle&s;&s;e that its <HI>Errour</HI> be <HI>Invincible, Antecedent,</HI> and he no wayes the cau&s;e of it; but if it be <HI>Vincible, Concomitant,</HI> or <HI>Sub&s;equent,</HI> and he him&s;elf the cau&s;e of it, then it excu&s;eth him not, but is a &s;in, and aggra|vates the &s;in that proceedeth of it, at lea&s;t <HI>exten&s;iv&egrave;,</HI> if not <HI>inten&s;iv&egrave;;</HI> For in &s;uch a ca&s;e, it is not his erroneous Con&s;cience, that is the cau&s;e of the <HI>&s;infull action of his Will,</HI> but his <HI>&s;infull Will,</HI> that is the cau&s;e of his <HI>erroneous Con&s;ci|ence.</HI> 9. The <HI>Civill Magi&s;trates</HI> threatning, <HI>per &s;e,</HI> and <HI>directly,</HI> maketh not his <HI>Con&s;cience erroneous,</HI> but found it &s;uch. 10. Neither is it the cau&s;e, that he goes again&s;t it; For whether ye con&s;ider the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trates</HI> Intention, his Iudgement, or the Execution of it in &s;uch a ca&s;e, they cau&s;e no ill, but good; for his Intention is onely, that they be gained to <HI>Chri&s;t,</HI> and that they &s;educe not others; His Iudgement condemneth onely their Opinion, and commands a puni&s;hment an&s;werable to their Sin, whereby onely they are hindered to continue in their Here&s;ies, or Schi&s;ms, or to &s;educe others: No more doth the Execution of his Iudgement. <HI>Ergo.</HI> 11. And I pray this new <HI>Ca&s;ui&s;t</HI> to tell me, whether in &s;ome <HI>Ca&s;es</HI> it were not a le&s;&s;er Sin, for a man to go again&s;t his <HI>erroneous Con&s;cience,</HI> then to follow its Dictates? Whether it were not better for him to &s;it at home, again&s;t the Dictate of his <HI>Con&s;cience,</HI> then to go to a <HI>Pagan Church,</HI> and there to adore a <HI>Crocodile,</HI> or a <HI>Toad,</HI> ac|cording to the Dictates of it.</P>
<P>So we &s;ee, how licentious and dete&s;table this <HI>Con&s;cience</HI> is, that Independ|ents plead &s;o much for, that thinketh, that it cannot &s;ufficiently enjoy its li|berty, unle&s;&s;e that all Schi&s;maticks, Hereticks, Jews, Mahumetans, and Ido|laters, have a free liberty of their <HI>erroneous Con&s;ciences,</HI> to adore a thou&s;and Gods, yea, a thou&s;and Devils, a <HI>Jupiter,</HI> a <HI>Bacchus,</HI> a <HI>Venus,</HI> a blinde <HI>Fortuna,</HI> and to Preach &s;uch Abominations; and that the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trates power</HI> be ever curtaled, or rather altogether taken away in matters in Religion.</P>
<PB N="191" REF="101">
<P>I will not call this a madne&s;&s;e, but I am well a&s;&s;ured, that many are re|commended to the Churches Prayers, that are not half &s;o &s;ick, either in Soul or Body, as the&s;e men are in their <HI>Con&s;ciences;</HI> Wherefore all that I have more to &s;ay unto them, &s;hall be onely this; <HI>The Lord have mercy upon them.</HI></P>
</DIV1>
<DIV1 TYPE="to the reader">
<OPENER><SALUTE>Chri&s;tian Reader,</SALUTE></OPENER>
<P>_HAving been de&s;ired by &s;ome Friends, to give a &s;hort Di&s;cour&s;e of the <HI>Independent Government,</HI> I am re&s;olved to pre&s;ent thee with this following <HI>Epitome;</HI> which &s;undry have often|times required of me.</P>
<P>The <HI>Independent Church</HI> is &s;o called, becau&s;e that no par|ticular Congregation among&s;t them, how &s;mall, how Hereti|call, and vicious &s;oever it be, will depend upon, or &s;ubmit to the Judgement of any other Church, yea, not to that of all the Churches of the World, how Orthodox, and holy, and how true and ju&s;t &s;oever their Judgement be.</P>
<P>They define it, <HI>Coetus Fidelium,</HI> a Company of Beleevers, meeting in one place, every Lords Day, for the Admini&s;tration of the Holy Ordinances of God, to publike Edification.</P>
<P>So according to this Definition, neither the <HI>Catholike Church,</HI> which we beleeve in the <HI>Creed,</HI> nor any <HI>Nationall Church</HI> can be a <HI>true Church,</HI> &s;ince they cannot meet together, every Lords Day in one place.</P>
<P>In the Efficient Cau&s;e of the Church, I &s;ee no great Difference betwixt us, and them, &s;ave onely this, That they hold it nece&s;&s;ary to the Con&s;titution of a Church, and of every Member thereof, that they all joyn in a particular <HI>Church-Covenant</HI> (as they call it) different from that of <HI>Grace,</HI> revealed in Scripture, wherein they all &s;wear to live in the <HI>Faith,</HI> and in &s;ubjection to all the Ordinances of God, cleaving one to another, as Members of one Body, and not to depart from the &s;aid particular Church, whereof they become Members, without the con&s;ent thereof.</P>
<P>The Antecedents of this <HI>Covenant</HI> are: 1. Sundry Meetings together of &s;uch, as are to joyn in it, till &s;uch time, as they may all have a &s;ufficient proof, and tryall of the <HI>&s;pirituall e&s;tate,</HI> one of another. 2. The <HI>Civill Magi&s;trates
<PB N="192" REF="102">Con&s;ent,</HI> to &s;et up their Church. 3. The <HI>Con&s;ent</HI> of <HI>Neighbour Churches.</HI> 4. They ordain a <HI>&s;olemn Fa&s;t;</HI> and after <HI>Prayers,</HI> and <HI>Sermons,</HI> one in the name of all the re&s;t propounds the <HI>Covenant.</HI> 5. And they all take it.</P>
<P>The Con&s;equents of it are, 1. The Right hand of Fellow&s;hip, which is given them by the <HI>Neighbour Churches.</HI> 2. Tho&s;e, who joyn in <HI>Covenant,</HI> are exhorted to &s;tand fa&s;t in the Lord. 3. Followeth a <HI>Prayer</HI> made to God for pardon of their Sins, and acceptance of the People.</P>
<P>We condemn not all <HI>Church-Covenants;</HI> but we cannot approve this of the <HI>Independents,</HI> 1. Becau&s;e it is not commanded in Scripture. 2. We finde no example of it in Scripture. 3. And therefore it is nothing el&s;e, but an humane Tradition. 4. Becau&s;e all, or almo&s;t all the <HI>Covenants</HI> concerning <HI>Religion,</HI> that we read of in Scripture, are of tho&s;e, that <HI>are already,</HI> and not of tho&s;e, that are <HI>to be</HI> Members of the Church. 5. Becau&s;e we are in <HI>Covenant</HI> with God before ever we come to be of Age; <HI>I &s;hall be thy God, and of thy Seed, Gen.</HI> 17.7. Item, <HI>Be baptized; for to you and your Children the Promi&s;e is made, Acts</HI> 2.38. And from hence all Prote&s;tants prove the Bapti&s;m of In|fants again&s;t Anabapti&s;ts. 6. Becau&s;e, tho&s;e that were Circumci&s;ed in the <HI>Old,</HI> and that are Baptized in the <HI>New Te&s;tament,</HI> are Members of the <HI>&V;ni|ver&s;all Church,</HI> without any vocall <HI>Covenant,</HI> as double <HI>C,</HI> who is one of the&s;e <HI>M. S. &s;es,</HI> as I hear, confe&s;&s;eth freely: <HI>Ergo,</HI> They mu&s;t be Members of &s;ome <HI>Particular Church;</HI> for how can they be in the <HI>&V;niver&s;all Church,</HI> and out of all <HI>Particular Churches?</HI> So a man might be in the World, and in no part of it, or out of all the parts of it. 7. Becau&s;e if Children Cir|cumci&s;ed or Baptized were not in the Church, their condition &s;hould be no better, then that of Jews and Pagans, which can be no great Con&s;olation to any Chri&s;tian Parents. 8. If a man of one Church &s;hould take to Wife one of another, a hundred miles di&s;tant from him, &s;he mu&s;t adhere to her Hus|band, live with him, and &s;o quit her own Church, and be out of all Churches, like a Pagan; for &s;he cannot be admitted to the Church, whereunto &s;he goeth, but after a long tryall: So to be married, &s;he becometh as a Pagan. 9. Such an Oath or Promi&s;e is not lawfull; for a man may have ju&s;t Cau&s;es, which are not evermore to be declared to a whole Church, that may oblige him to go, and live el&s;ewhere in an other Church. 10. Becau&s;e the Apo&s;tles, Evangeli&s;ts, and their Followers, could not lawfully enter into any &s;uch <HI>Covenant,</HI> &s;ince they were <HI>&V;niver&s;all Mini&s;ters,</HI> &amp; con&s;equently <HI>Members</HI> of all the <HI>Churches</HI> of the World: 11. Neither could they make &s;uch a tryall of three thou&s;and per&s;ons, that in &s;even or eight houres time were added unto the Church, <HI>Acts</HI> 2.12. Such a <HI>Covenant</HI> includeth a tacite Schi&s;m, and Separation from all the Churches of the World. 13. Neither did the Apo&s;tles, and other Mini&s;ters of the Church, for the fir&s;t three hundred yeers, require the <HI>Civill Magi|&s;trates</HI> Con&s;ent, to &s;et up their Churches: 14. Neither is it nece&s;&s;ary to the Internall Con&s;titution, or Con&s;ervation of it, &s;ince it is Extrin&s;ecall to the
<PB N="193" REF="102">Church. 15. And &s;ome times it is impo&s;&s;ible to be had, as when he is a Pagan, or an Antichri&s;tian Chri&s;tian.</P>
<P>The Finall Cau&s;e of their Church, they pretend to be, 1. Gods glory. 2. The Salvation of the Church, and every Member thereof. 3. The Inter|nall and Externall Acts of mutuall Communion in Faith and Charity.</P>
<P>The Matter of their Church, they hold to be &s;uch Per&s;ons, as can give &s;ome particular Evidences of &s;aving Grace, and of their Election, and who enter into Church-Covenant together; &s;uch as may be Arminians, as Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwin, alias M. S.</HI> And as for the Members of other Churches, whether they be Dependents, or Independents, they will not admit them to the Lords Table, nor Baptize their Children, upon any Letters of Recommendation, that they can bring from other Churches; yea, howbeit they give a &s;ufficient account of their Faith, and live without giving any offence at all to any man; and &s;o they hold them little better then Pagans.</P>
<P>The Integrant p rts of this Church, are the Flock or People, and the Ru|lers, <HI>viz.</HI> Preachers, Teachers, Ruling Elders, and Deacons.</P>
<P>They admit none to be Ruling Elders, but &s;uch as Preach; yea, to the People, they give liberty to Preach al&s;o; and &s;o quite confound the Offices of Preachers, and Ruling Elders, which the Apo&s;tle di&s;tingui&s;hes, <HI>Rom.</HI> 12. 1 <HI>Cor.</HI> 12. <HI>Eph.</HI> 4. 1 <HI>Tim.</HI> 5. <HI>Matth.</HI> 18. So they confound the charge of the Pa&s;tor, with the duty of the Sheep, and a Ruler with him that is ruled.</P>
<P>The Form of their Church &s;eemeth to con&s;i&s;t in their Church-Covenant.</P>
<P>The Accidents of it, are, 1. The number, <HI>viz.</HI> the &s;malle&s;t, &s;even Per&s;ons; and the greate&s;t, as many, as can conveniently meet in one place, for the Admini&s;tration of the Holy Ordinances of God.</P>
<P N="2">2. Their Doctrine, which may be Arminian, as appeareth by <HI>M. S. alias</HI> Ma&s;ter <HI>Goodwin,</HI> who holds very many Arminian Tenets, as Ju&s;tification by Faith, <HI>as it is an Act, or Quality, &amp;c. Item,</HI> As &s;ome te&s;tifie of him; A &s;leep|ing of the Soul.</P>
<P N="3">3. They have no common Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, or Platform of Di&s;cipline in their <HI>Churches;</HI> neither will they have any; yea, they will not have any con&s;tant Confe&s;&s;ion of Faith, or Platform of Di&s;cipline in any Particular; &s;uch is the Liberty, or rather the Licenciou&s;ne&s;&s;e of their Faith, and Di&s;ci|pline.</P>
<P N="4">4. The power to Teach, which they gram, as I have already &s;aid, not onely to Preachers, but al&s;o to Ruling Elders, and &s;ome of the People.</P>
<P N="5">5. The power of the Keyes, which they put in the hands of the People; yea, of the mo&s;t ignorant, impertinent, and in&s;ufficient of them, who have power to create their own Mini&s;ters, to examine their Doctrine, and &s;uffici|ency, and afterward to admit them to the Charge.</P>
<P>But whether they have, 1. Abilities. 2. And prudence enough to do it. 3. Whether Chri&s;t have committed the Keyes unto them. 4. Whether they
<PB N="194" REF="103" MS="y">can do it without confu&s;ion. 5. Whether they had it in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament;</HI> I leave it to any judicious Readers con&s;ideration.</P>
<P N="6">6. Yea, &s;ome of them in the Synod, grant unto Women, &s;ome <HI>&s;prinkling;</HI> I be|leeve, as &s;ome corrected them there, they would have &s;aid, <HI>the gingling of the Keyes;</HI> but of this <HI>&s;pinking, &s;prinkling, or gingling of the Keyes,</HI> we read no|thing in the Word of God.</P>
<P N="7">7. They hold the Object of Excommunication onely to be errours of the Minde, again&s;t the common, and uncontroverted Principles; and of the Will, again&s;t the common, and univer&s;all practi&s;es of Chri&s;tianity; and both a|gain&s;t the Parties known light. So hardly can any man be Excommunicated. 1. For we cannot well know, when a man goeth again&s;t the common Prin|ciples of Chri&s;tianity, &s;ince no man can well define them. 2. Muchle&s;&s;e, when he goeth again&s;t the light of his Con&s;cience; or 3. again&s;t the common practi&s;es of Chri&s;tianity, which are not well known. 4. According to this Tenet, we cannot Excommunicate Socinians, Arminians, and other Hereticks; and therefore <HI>M. S.</HI> is admitted to be a Mini&s;ter in one of their Churches. 5. Howbeit, they acknowledge no man in their Pari&s;h to be a Member of their Church, yet can they very well, and in good Con&s;cience, take a Bene|fice, were it never &s;o great, yea, of 300, 400, or 500 l. a yeer. 6. They beleeve, that the <HI>Civill Magi&s;trate</HI> &s;hould not, and con&s;equently hath no power to puni&s;h Idolaters, or Hereticks, were their Here&s;ie never &s;o great: And fir&s;t, &s;o (be it &s;aid without Bla&s;phemy) God &s;hould have been in the wrong, in commanding it in the <HI>Old Te&s;tament.</HI> Secondly, And it were very &s;trange, that a man &s;hould be puni&s;hed for offending a man, and not for bla&s;|pheming the good Name of God. Thirdly, So he &s;hould be puni&s;hed, for calling &s;ome Independents Knaves, but not for calling <HI>Je&s;us Chri&s;t</HI> the Sun of God, and the Redeemer of our Souls a Knave.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
<PB REF="103">
</DIV1>
</BACK>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
