<!DOCTYPE ETS PUBLIC "-//UMDLPS//DTD EEBOPROOF 2.0//EN">
<ETS>
<TEMPHEAD>
<REVDESCR>
<CHANGE>
<DATE>2014-07-08</DATE>
<RESPSTMT>
<NAME>Olivia Bottum</NAME>
<RESP>MURP</RESP>
</RESPSTMT>
<ITEM>Proofed text and corrected markup.</ITEM>
</CHANGE>
</REVDESCR>
</TEMPHEAD>
<EEBO>
<IDG S="marc" R="UM" ID="B20662">
<STC T="W">C6044A</STC>
<BIBNO T="oclc">[ocm]11196403</BIBNO>
<VID>204875</VID>
</IDG>
<TEXT LANG="eng">
<BODY>
<DIV1 TYPE="text">
<PB REF="1">
<PB N="1" REF="1" MS="y">
<HEAD>A COOLE CONFERENCE between the Cleared Reformation and the <HI>Apologeticall Narration,</HI> brought together by a well-willer to both.</HEAD>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">Pag. 1.</NOTE>_REformat. <HI>While&s;t we the meane&s;t of many, &amp;c. wait for uni|formity in Religion, &s;o much de&s;ired by all the Godly in the three Kingdoms; unto which an entrance is made by a &s;olemn League, and Covenant.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apologet.</HI> We approve (worthy brethren) your expectation as ju&s;t, and confe&s;&s;e our own de&s;ires of it, &s;o as <HI>Reformation</HI> be not taken <HI>indebite</HI> in a &s;trict &s;tinted &s;ence, but according to your lati|tude expre&s;&s;ed pag. 15. <HI>We are</HI> (&s;ay you) <HI>neither &s;o ignorant, nor &s;o arrogant as to a&s;cribe to the Church of Scotland</HI> (its your own phra&s;e) <HI>&s;uch ab&s;olute purity and perfection, as hath not need, or cannot admit of further Reformation.</HI> So you. A golden peace &s;ignifying &s;peech as if dropped from the mouth of &s;ome <HI>Chry&s;o&s;tome,</HI> or conceived by &s;ome <HI>Ireneus;</HI> pluck you that end, and we the other likewi&s;e, and we &s;hall be fa&s;tned with a <HI>Cordian</HI> knot. Of which our endeavour you have a full te&s;timony in our League and Covenant, wherein we &s;wear to <HI>indeavour the pre&s;ervation of the reformed Religion in Scotland;</HI> we &s;ay of <HI>Religion</HI> and <HI>Reformed;</HI> is, or &s;hall be; and till further reformation, we <HI>will pre&s;erve it again&s;t our common enemie,</HI> that you be not made to retreat from that you have wonne. And that <HI>we will indeavour the reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in doctrine, wor&s;hip, di&s;cipline and government, according to the Word of God, &amp; the example of the be&s;t reformed Churches.</HI> So farre the Covenant. Wherein it is as evident as if written with a Sunne beame, that the Churches of England have not ingaged them&s;elves to come down to you, or do bind you to come to us, but the common rendevous where we mu&s;t all meet is the <HI>be&s;t re|formed Churches:</HI> and that <HI>according to the word of God,</HI> which is that Standard of perfection that mu&s;t weigh and mea&s;ure out unto us our <HI>uniformity.</HI></P>
<PB N="2" REF="2" MS="y">
<P>Reformat. <HI>We find our &s;elves bound again&s;t the prejudices, and mi&s;|takings of &s;ome who in the dark are afraid of that which they know not, and &s;uffer their affections of love and hatred to run before their under&s;tand|ing; and again&s;t the mi&s;-repre&s;entations and indirect a&s;per&s;ions of others who do &s;o commend their own way, that the reformed Churches thereby &s;uffer di&s;paragement; to give that te&s;timony unto the order and government of the reformed Churches, and particularly of the Church of Scotland, which they do well de&s;erve.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apologet.</HI> Ah deare brethren, why would ye &s;peak thus? Do the&s;e expre&s;&s;ions (in the judgement of <HI>candor</HI>) &s;uit with your pro|fe&s;&s;ion, pag. 2. <HI>where you promi&s;e that you indeavour nothing but a &s;imple and innocent manife&s;tation and defence, without de&s;ire or intention to give the &s;malle&s;t offence to any who fear God, love the truth, and, &amp;c.</HI> So you. Let an impartiall Angel &s;peak, whether multitudes of gracious hearts are not ju&s;tly offended at this bitterne&s;&s;e &s;o un&s;ea&s;onably admini&s;tred, and applied too, to wrong parties? Ah, how ea&s;ie is it by our &s;elf-mi&s;ta&s;ting hearts (like the &s;orry Artificer that makes two cracks, whiles he is patching and hammering up one) rather to cau&s;e prejudices, then cure them. You may be con|fident (let all the world look upon the Apologie and judge) that the <HI>five Members</HI> of the A&s;&s;embly ca&s;t no prejudices upon you, to whom you have &s;o ha&s;tily replied. And for private barkings of incon&s;iderate and incon&s;iderable men, they are either un|known or un-owned (as is &s;uppo&s;ed) by men of your gravitie. All wi&s;e men generally are &s;ilently intentive, expecting not paper replyes, but di&s;puted Po&s;itions from the A&s;&s;embly, grounded on Scripture. And therefore this paper comes abroad onely to be|&s;eech that on either &s;ide there may be committed no more brea|ches of the peace Eccle&s;ia&s;tick, and to leave the Apologie (if it may be) under the &s;ame candid opinion that rayed forth upon it afore this cloud came and interpo&s;ed. Sure if the Hou&s;es of Parliament allow any of the A&s;&s;embly differing in opinion touching the matters propo&s;ed to them (whereof Di&s;cipline is one) to pre&s;ent their judgements with their rea&s;ons unto the &s;aid Hou&s;es;<NOTE PLACE="marg">So the Ordi|nance for the A&s;&s;embly. p. 5.</NOTE> you cannot judge it a crime to &s;end forth a <HI>prodromum</HI> pre&s;ented to the Parliament to tell them and you how farre they clo&s;e with you and other reformed Churches, and di&s;&s;ent from the Separation and Browni&s;ts. And therefore have not de&s;erved to be whipt with a reply. Pardon the phra&s;e, for indeed it is a
<PB N="3" REF="2" MS="y"> &s;mart &s;troke upon the &s;pirits of under&s;tanding men, and &s;tanding forth in and for a publick Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall cau&s;e to be taxed for tho&s;e <HI>who in the dark are afraid of that which they know not, and to &s;uffer their affections, &amp;c. to run before their under&s;tanding, &amp;c.</HI> Sweet bre|thren do you call your books (frequent among us) <HI>the government of the Church of Scotland the A&s;&s;ertion of your government, the peaceable Plea darkne&s;&s;e?</HI> Or do you think that the Elders of the <HI>Quinque Eccle&s;iae,</HI> or others that &s;tudy Di&s;cipline to be dark? Are we not morall men <HI>(voluntas vult ut intellectus intelligit)</HI> to under&s;tand fir&s;t, and affect after? Or wherein hath appeared this prepo&s;terou&s;|ne&s;&s;e towards you, whiles the Apologie &s;miles upon you, and &s;weetly cals you and Holland by name the <HI>more reformed Churches,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. 6.</NOTE> do you give them one &s;uch a kind word in all your Reply? And more then that, you call not your &s;elves, <HI>confe&s;&s;ing a need of further Reformation</HI> as we noted, and quoted afore. If then they have commended your Churches according to your own judgements of your &s;elves, how hath their commendation of other Churches appeared to di&s;commend yours? e&s;pecially whiles they com|mend not their own for &s;o perfect, but that they found a nece&s;&s;ity of holding this for one of their three rules by which they walk|ed, in the&s;e words;<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. 10.11.</NOTE> <HI>Not to make our pre&s;ent judgement and practi&s;e a binding law unto our &s;elves for future, which we likewi&s;e made continuall profe&s;&s;ion of upon all occa&s;ions. We had too great an in&s;tance of our own frailty in the former way of conformity; and therefore in a jealou&s;ie of our &s;elves, we kept this re&s;erve (which we made open and con&s;tant profe&s;&s;ions of) to alter and retract (though not lightly) what ever &s;hould be di&s;covered to be taken up out of a mi&s;under&s;tanding af the rule.</HI> So far the Apolog. There is yet one thing more that makes the Apologi&s;ts more con|fident of their candor, in that it received &s;o great an approba|tion from &s;o pious and learned a man of your judgement, and a Member of the A&s;&s;embly: As on the other &s;ide, though the A&s;|&s;embly voted you thanks, yet was it onely for the books you gave them, not for the Reply, as it was expre&s;&s;e (to that effect) in the vote, if ob&s;ervation fail not.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 2. <HI>Our wayes &s;ince our coming into this Kingdom have been, and (&s;o farre as the truth will &s;uffer us) ever &s;hall be, to unite, and not to divide; to compo&s;e rather then to create differences; the principall end of the A&s;&s;embly of Divines.</HI></P>
<PB N="4" REF="3">
<P><HI>Apol.</HI> Yet &s;o contrary a face and voice to that, did this paper &s;eem to have at fir&s;t blu&s;h and &s;ound thereof, that &s;ome thoughts and throbs of heart began to doubt whether this blow (intended for a &s;econd) upon an imagination of a fir&s;t, were not given by &s;ome to carry on the de&s;igne of utter di&s;-uniting the Pre&s;|byterians from others; or at lea&s;t to put them into a capacitie to be challenged and contended with; till the Title appeared <HI>By the Commi&s;&s;ioners of the A&s;&s;embly of Scotland;</HI> and then all thoughts were turned to wonder, that &s;uch grave per&s;onages &s;hould once think that this their paper could in the lea&s;t, tend to compo&s; all, or prove pacificatorie; e&s;pecially &s;eeing it did carry a &s;hew of taking the bu&s;ine&s;&s;e out of the hands of the A&s;&s;embly (which you here mention) if the Apologie in any thing had been to be bla|med. But however notwith&s;tanding this extrajudiciall and ex|centricall act thus happening, we tru&s;t, and &s;hall indeavour that there may not be the lea&s;t mi&s;-contending in any kind about it, though many godly hearts may be grieved at it, and none can help it. The&s;e lines we now pen are rather to intreat all not to <HI>mi&s;take</HI> the Apologie, then to <HI>take you up.</HI></P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 3. <HI>The order and government of the reformed Churches in the beauty and &s;trength thereof, as it is not hid in a corner, wrapped up in a my&s;tery, or, covered under a cloud of darkne&s;&s;e, but is known to the Nations and kingdoms of the earth, openly profe&s;&s;ed and practi&s;ed in the eyes of the world, &amp;c. &s;o it is commended and already confirmed by a long tract of time.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apol.</HI> Yet we pre&s;ume you will joyne i&s;&s;ue with us in this a|gain&s;t the Papi&s;ts, that neither vi&s;ibilitie, nor &s;ucce&s;&s;ion are e&s;|&s;entiall notes of a true Church. The holy Gho&s;t prophe&s;ied that the true Church, <HI>Revel.</HI> 12. &s;hould be hid in the wilderne&s;&s;e for a long time; as yours and ours were many yeers before <HI>Luthers</HI> time. You your &s;elves confe&s;&s;e, pag. 16. <HI>That the u&s;urpation and ty|ranny of Prelates and Prelaticall party, did a time &s;o reigne and rage in your Kingdom, vexing the godly Mini&s;tery and people, that tho&s;e that went to New England dur&s;t not venter to come to you to find a vi&s;ible Church li|berty.</HI> And pag. 11. <HI>That you long time could but intend and de&s;igne the government of the Church by A&s;&s;emblies and Presbyteries.</HI> So you. How vi&s;ible &s;oever the Churches be, the eyes of <HI>the world</HI> (of which you &s;peak) will take but little cognizance; or if they do, will give but a &s;lender te&s;timonie to them; whiles one Church differing
<PB N="5" REF="3" MS="y"> but in &s;ome peeces of Di&s;cipline, will &s;o di&s;-favour others that jump not with them. Ble&s;&s;ed be God (brethren) that God hath made a <HI>Rehoboth</HI> for you,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Gen. 26.22.</NOTE> that you are not now kept up in a cor|ner. Though other Churches have not yet attained that inlarge|ment of place and peace, yet they keep not up their minds in a <HI>my&s;tery</HI> if Narrations, Apologies and Di&s;putes may make men un|der&s;tand. And as for the clouds of darkne&s;&s;e which may cover them; who can hinder the winds if they blow and bring black weather out of the <HI>North,</HI> or <HI>We&s;t,</HI> to ob&s;cure them that love not to &s;it out of the Sunne beams; much le&s;&s;e to be wrapt up in black &s;heets. But they de&s;ire with patience and peace to bear all; wait|ing till that great Que&s;tion be re&s;olved, which Di&s;cipline be the <HI>truly anciente&s;t,</HI> and <HI>of longe&s;t tract of time (hic labor, hoc opus)</HI> and not to begge the que&s;tion.</P>
<P>Reformat. p. 4. <HI>The in&s;truments which the Lord u&s;ed in the ble&s;&s;ed work of Reformation of the Church of Scotland, were not onely learned and holy men, but had &s;omewhat in their callings, and gifts, and zeal to the glory of God, more then ordinary. Some of them had a propheticall &s;pirit; and &s;ome of them were honoured to be Martyrs.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apologet.</HI> Nor hath the Lord (ble&s;&s;ed be his name) left us with|out &s;uch. Per&s;ecuted <HI>Brightman</HI> (whom p. 15. you name with ho|nour) had tho&s;e gifts of learning, zeal, and &s;pirit of prophe&s;ie you mention; compare the late events both in your Kingdome and ours with his Comment on the <HI>Revel.</HI> who though he did ju&s;tly preferre your Churches in his time before &s;ome others, yet not a Cla&s;&s;icall Presbytery before a Congregationall govern|ment, for ought that we have read or heard. And what le&s;&s;e then a &s;pirit of prophe&s;ie was in that holy <HI>Martyr</HI> per&s;ecuted to death by the Bp. that &s;aid,<NOTE PLACE="marg">1 Sam. 3.11.</NOTE> <HI>that the Lord would bring in his own di&s;cipline in his time in that way as would make all their eares to tingle:</HI> Which Scrip|ture phra&s;e, was con&s;trued to be trea&s;on, though &s;ince like a pro|phe&s;ie it is fulfilled. For martyrdome unto a civill death we can &s;ay &s;omewhat more, thovgh we do but mention <HI>Cartwrit,</HI> and <HI>Parker,</HI> whom you ju&s;tly mention with honour in your <HI>Peaceable Plea.</HI> But we li&s;t not to inlarge; therefore we omit our brethren in New England. Becau&s;e though martyrdome be a kinde of &s;eal, yet being a broad &s;eal to all the truths in the Scripture, it doth not di&s;tingui&s;h <HI>ad api<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">em,</HI> to put a greater impre&s;&s;ion on one truth then on another. For in all ages &s;ome Saints have by &s;uf|fering
<PB N="6" REF="4" MS="y"> chiefly &s;ealed to &s;ome <HI>pre&s;ent truth:</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">2 Pet. 1.12.</NOTE> as the <HI>Apo&s;tles</HI> again&s;t <HI>Judai&s;me,</HI> the <HI>Saints in the ten per&s;ecutions</HI> again&s;t <HI>Hetheni&s;me, Atha|na&s;ius</HI> again&s;t <HI>Arriani&s;me, Luther</HI> again&s;t <HI>Papi&s;me, You</HI> again&s;t <HI>Pre|lacy.</HI> And others again&s;t an Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall <HI>coactive power</HI> where Chri&s;t hath not &s;etled it.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 7. <HI>As the Church of Scotland agreed in &s;ome things with the reformed Churches, &s;o it cannot be &s;atisfactory that any Church &s;hould</HI> onely <HI>practi&s;e</HI> &s;ome <HI>things univer&s;ally received in the re|formed Churches.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apol.</HI> A bare relation of the words of the Apologie is a &s;uffi|cient an&s;wer to this, which are the&s;e. 1 <HI>The &s;upreme rule without us was the primitive pattern and example of the Churches erected by the Apo&s;tles.</HI> 2 <HI>Not to make our pre&s;ent judgement and practi&s;e a binding law unto our &s;elves for future.</HI> 3 <HI>That in matters of greate&s;t moment and controver&s;ie we &s;till cho&s;e to practi&s;e &s;afely, and &s;o as we had rea&s;on to judge that all &s;orts, or the mo&s;t of all Churches did acknowledge warrantable.</HI> So the Apolog. By which words it is apparent that their intent and endeavour was not <HI>onely</HI> to practi&s;e <HI>&s;ome</HI> things univer&s;ally recei|ved in the reformed Churches; but to go full as far forth, as the Churches founded by the Apo&s;tles. But for matters of <HI>greate&s;t mo|ment and controver&s;ie,</HI> in what particulars the reformed Churches (in their be&s;t judgements) left the pattern of the Apo&s;tolicall Churches, there they &s;u&s;pended their a&s;&s;ent and practi&s;e, but joyning with them in the re&s;t. Keeping this for a re&s;erve, that when further light &s;hould come in, that they might do more lawfully, then formerly they dur&s;t do; then to do it, and be di&s;|ingaged from their former judgement and practi&s;e, which in ef|fect you profe&s;&s;e, pag. 15. &s;aying, that the Church of Scotland may admit of further reformation. Therefore it is &s;uppo&s;ed that for the pre&s;ent you <HI>onely</HI> practi&s;e <HI>&s;ome</HI> things of reformation; and that for future when you have more light and power, you will advance from your pre&s;ent practi&s;e to a further.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 6. <HI>They did honour</HI> Luther <HI>and</HI> Calvin, <HI>&amp;c. who had an heart or hand, &amp;c. in the ble&s;&s;ed work of Reformation, &amp;c. But for this to call us Calvinians, and the reformed Churches Calvinian reformed Churches, is to di&s;grace the true Churches of Chri&s;t, and to &s;ymbolize with the Papi&s;ts, who call them&s;elves the Catholick Church, &amp;c. The Separation may be well allowed to be called Browni&s;ts.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apologet.</HI> Ah brethren, from what &s;pirit comes all this? The
<PB N="7" REF="4" MS="y"> whole de&s;igne of framing a confutation of a plain, &s;imple, mo|de&s;t, &s;ingle hearted narration, reli&s;hed bitter upon multitudes of godly and judicious palates. But here we have met (if we mi&s;|take not the drug) with the <HI>Coloquintida,</HI> or if it be intended for a better <HI>Recipe,</HI> it is &s;calding hot, if our ta&s;te fails us not. Can the Apologie po&s;&s;ibly be conceived in the word <HI>Calvinian</HI> to in|tend the lea&s;t grain of di&s;grace to any? Is it not the terme u&s;ed in all the true Chri&s;tian Churches for di&s;tinctions &s;ake from the more corrupt <HI>Lutheran?</HI> Is it not in oppo&s;ition to them (more cor|rupt) a terme of honour? Was it not u&s;ed of purpo&s;e to decline the word <HI>Presbiterian,</HI> that le&s;&s;e offence might be taken whiles the termes now in controver&s;ie were waved? Doth not the Apo|logie deeply profe&s;&s;e that multitudes of Churches in England were true Churches; and yet for honour of you, cals the Chur|ches of Scotland <HI>more reformed?</HI> But you object, that <HI>this is to &s;ym|bolize with the Papi&s;t, who call them&s;elves the Catholick Church:</HI> we take your objection to be our full an&s;wer. As &s;ure as the Papi&s;ts do not intend to di&s;grace them&s;elves in calling them&s;elves Ca|tholicks; &s;o &s;ure is it beleeved that the <HI>Apologi&s;ts</HI> who are <HI>Calvi|nians</HI> in Doctrine at lea&s;t (if not more) did not intend to di&s;grace them&s;elves and the brethren (holding the &s;ame doctrine and truth) with the terme <HI>Clavinian.</HI> Yet, as if in revenge,<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. 5.</NOTE> you ding the words <HI>Separation,</HI> and <HI>Browni&s;ts</HI> again&s;t the Apologi&s;ts, who had &s;o clearly renounced that rigid opinion and way in their Apologie. As if you had forgotten, or did intend to mi&s;-apply what you had &s;aid but the next line afore quoted out of <HI>Hierom. viz. If any where we find men profe&s;&s;ing Chri&s;tianity, called by the parti|cular names of men, know them to be the &s;ynagogue of Antichri&s;t, and not the Church of Chri&s;t.</HI> Oh unhappie conjunction; oh heavy appli|cation, oh coal-black termes; <HI>Quod ego &mdash; Sed motos pr<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">&s;tat componere fluctus.</HI> Were it not for patience, nay that would hardly do it; were it not for reverence of you and your Nation; an home an&s;wer would be &s;haped, to &s;uch a mi&s;-&s;hapen mi&s;pri&s;ion. But to love is to live. The Kingdom is on fire, we need not hold coals to one another. Peace be upon the &s;ons of peace; But let not that imputation fall upon us, to &s;et our hou&s;es on fire to ro&s;t our own egges.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 10. <HI>Nothing was farrer from their thoughts and in|tentions then to frame in their own forge a lesbian rule an&s;werable to any
<PB N="8" REF="5"> particular form of civill policy, or compliable with State ends.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> Whether the&s;e words in the Apologie, pag. 3. (for you tread upon the heels of the Apologie &s;tep after &s;tep) <HI>We had no new Common-wealths to reare, to frame Church government unto,</HI> do pro|voke to any &s;uch an&s;wer, let all indifferent men judge. For who doth not know that you had no new Common-wealths to reare? This might farre ea&s;ier been under&s;tood of New England, and yet without &s;urmi&s;e of any blame laid upon them, who had the Kings Patent for what they did in policy, as Gods Word for Church government, which they have followed clo&s;e with a great deal of judgement.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 11. <HI>Nor do we know any rea&s;on why education in &s;ound doctrine, and true wor&s;hip &s;hould be accounted a matter of thanke&s;|giving to God, and yet &s;hould glory in this, that we are not by education in|gaged in any one form of Di&s;cipline, and Church government, but left to our &s;elves to be moulded by our own private thoughts.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> There is no &s;uch doxologie in the Apologie, as to thank God for their di&s;engagedne&s;&s;e from, or non education in true reformed Churches. They expre&s;&s;e their &s;orrow, that the defilement of the Churches of England, cau&s;ed their exilement out of the Churches of England. Their naked words are onely the&s;e.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. 4.</NOTE> <HI>We were not engaged by education, or otherwi&s;e, to any other of the reformed Churches.</HI> And for your intimated charge <HI>of being left to them&s;elves to be moulded by their own private thoughts, touching Church government,</HI> their own words do mo&s;t tran&s;parently clear them. <HI>We were not engaged</HI> (&s;ay they) <HI>by education,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. 4.</NOTE> <HI>&amp;c. to other of the reform|ed Churches; yet we con&s;ulted with reverence what they hold forth both in writings and practi&s;e. We had the advantage of all that light which the conflicts of our Divines (the good old No conformi&s;ts) had &s;truck forth in their times; and the draughts of Di&s;cipline, which they had drawn. We had likewi&s;e the fatall mi&s;carriages and &s;hipwracks of the Separation (whom ye call Browni&s;ts) as land-marks to forewarne us of tho&s;e rocks and &s;helves they ran upon, and to enquire into the principles that might be the cau&s;es of their divi&s;ions. La&s;t of all, we had the recent and later examples of the wayes, and practi&s;es (and tho&s;e improved to a better edition and greater refinement, &amp;c.) of tho&s;e multitudes of godly men of our own Na|tion, almo&s;t to the number of another Nation, and among them &s;ome as holy and judicious Divines as this Kingdom hath bred. All which we looked upon nakedly according to the Word of God.</HI> Thus the Apologie. Out
<PB N="9" REF="5" MS="y"> of which words the venemous &s;pider of envy cannot (much le&s;&s;e you brethren that are men of a better &s;pirit) extract and draw ju&s;tly this conclu&s;ion, <HI>That the Apologi&s;ts intended to mould a govern|ment in and by their own private thoughts.</HI> They were not &s;o left to them&s;elves by the oppo&s;itions of the times, but that they carried with them the golden mea&s;uring reed of the Word of God; and did with all the judgement and divine a&s;&s;i&s;tance they had, mea|&s;ure and &s;quare every inch as they built. Nor doth it yet appear to &s;ome that wi&s;hly look after the&s;e things, in what materiall things their buildings differ from others, unle&s;&s;e about the <HI>gene|rall</HI> and <HI>common</HI> roofe, whether it &s;hall be the mon&s;trous <HI>Arches</HI> of Epi&s;copacy, or the <HI>cemented vault</HI> of a cla&s;&s;icall Presbytery, or of <HI>Jeru&s;alem</HI> work of an <HI>Apo&s;tolicall</HI> Councell. And this maine que&s;ti|on is now among them, <HI>Quos penes arbitrium e&s;t, &amp; vis, &amp; norma lo|quendi.</HI></P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 11. <HI>The Churches planted by the Apo&s;tles, if not at fir&s;t, yet afterwards were of greater number in one City, then did, or could ordinarily a&s;&s;emble in one place for the wor&s;hip of God, and therefore had a plurality of Pa&s;tors, and Officers, which made a common Presbytery for go|verning the whole.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apologet.</HI> The&s;e words makes a &s;peech of a Judge at an A&s;&s;izes touching <HI>Lent-fa&s;tings</HI> to come to mind. Who &s;aid, <HI>that he could prove that Lent-fastings were of Apo&s;tolicall in&s;titution for the last &s;ix hundred yeers.</HI> Whereupon one &s;tanding by &s;aid to another of his friends, <HI>That all the craft and cunning lay in this, for the Judge to prove it to be Apo&s;tolicall for the fir&s;t &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">x hundred yeers, or the fir&s;t hundred or first fourty yeers.</HI> But to return to the Apologie; who&s;e words are milde, and &s;oft, but as wooll-packs deadning Cannon &s;hot, that the bullets can do no hurt, can make no battery.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> <HI>We could not</HI> (&s;aith the Apologie) <HI>but imagine that the fir&s;t Churches planted by the Apo&s;tles, were ordinarily, of no more in one City at fir&s;t, then might make up one entire congregation, ruled by their own Elders,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Ob&s;erve that the &s;ame argu|ment that is urged to prove a Presbytery, was formerly urged by the Bi&s;hops to prove an Epi&s;|copacy.</NOTE> <HI>that al&s;o preached to them: For that in every City where they came, the number of converts did, or &s;hould ari&s;e to &s;uch a multitude as to make &s;everall and &s;undrie Congre|gations, or that the Apo&s;tles &s;hould &s;tay the &s;etting up of any Churches at all, untill they ro&s;e to &s;uch a numerous multiplication as might make &s;uch a Presbyteriall combination, we did not imagine. We found al&s;o the Non-co<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">formi&s;ts in their an&s;wer to the arguments u&s;ed for Epi&s;copall govern|ment over many Churches, brought from the in&s;tances of the multitudes of
<PB N="10" REF="6"> beleevers at Jeru&s;alem, and other places and Cities mentioned in the New Testament, to a&s;&s;ert, that it could not be infallibly proved that any of tho&s;e we read of in the Acts, or el&s;ewhere, were yet &s;o numerous, as nece&s;&s;arily to exceed the limits of one particular Congregation in tho&s;e first times.</HI> So the Apologie. The word <HI>afterwards</HI> hath a large extent, and there|fore doth not punctually tell us whether you mean <HI>after</HI> the Apo|&s;tles times or <HI>when,</HI> and therefore doth nothing weaken the Apo|logie, and &s;o you and we mu&s;t leave it as we found it unblemi&s;h|ed in this, as the re&s;t; which is the onely de&s;igne in this paper, leaving it to di&s;putation to be di&s;cu&s;&s;ed out.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 13. <HI>To avouch when we are not challenged, that we a&s;cribe more to the Magi&s;trate then the reformed Churches do, they being faithfull to their own principles of Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall government, may &s;uffer a harder con&s;truction then we our &s;elves would willingly undergo, or put upon the intentions of men, who &s;eek not their own things, but the things of Je|&s;us Chri&s;t.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> Let the world judge whether the Apologizers and tho&s;e of their judgements were not <HI>challenged,</HI> when the <HI>Peaceable Plea</HI> cals them, not onely in the book, but in the title of the book in the face of the world, <HI>Independents.</HI> Which the Apologie could not but upon ju&s;t grounds, count <HI>as a proud and in&s;olent title (for any to a&s;&s;ume) and as a trumpet of defiance again&s;t what ever power,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Apol. p. 23.</NOTE> <HI>Spirituall or Civill;</HI> from them that &s;hould be conceived to own it; and ther|fore do in expre&s;&s;e words there <HI>abhor it, and dete&s;t it:</HI> that Chur|ches, and Magi&s;trates &s;hould not loo&s;e the true face of their judgement in &s;uch a &s;welling title.<NOTE PLACE="marg">Reform. p. <HI>23.</HI> Con&s;ule Be|zam de Hae|reticis a civili Magi&s;tr puniendis.</NOTE> For if upon a gro&s;&s;e errour of an another Church they dare exerci&s;e onely a <HI>non communion</HI> with it, which after you call <HI>no authoritie;</HI> then there is more left for the Magi&s;trate to do, then when you have excommunicated it, which you call there, your power. So likewi&s;e when a cla&s;&s;icall Presbyterie, of many Mini&s;ters and lay-men, and tho&s;e of great place and power in the Common-wealth, &s;hall authoritatively rule all matters of &s;ixtie or an hundred Pari&s;hes that are but mixtly Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall but partly &s;ecular or civill, if &s;ome of them not &s;o altogether, one would think now that here were left le&s;&s;e to the Magi&s;trate, then when every one of tho&s;e &s;everall Pari&s;hes regularly gathered into a Church way do meddle with no|thing, as Churches, but things purely Eccle&s;ia&s;ticall; leaving the re&s;t to the Magi&s;trate who is the civill power over them all. We
<PB N="11" REF="6" MS="y"> give for the pre&s;ent &s;ome &s;mall in&s;tance to take off the prejudices of us that may be in&s;tilled into the minds of civill power by the abhorred name of <HI>Independancy;</HI> and not to bring any or their way into an <HI>odium</HI> with any; as we hope they in their books that have &s;o oft up the names of <HI>Separation, Browni&s;me, Independancy, Popular Anarchie, &amp;c.</HI> do not intend to render us odious. For till Church government be clearly di&s;cu&s;&s;ed according to the Scrip|tures, the &s;cale is even which &s;ide (to u&s;e your own words) <HI>doth mo&s;t imitate the Pagans and Infidels of old, the Papi&s;ts, Prelates,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Reform. p. <HI>13.</HI></NOTE> <HI>and Ar|minians of late to make the way of Chri&s;t hatefull to Princes and Magi|&s;trates.</HI> And till it doth appear who&s;e principles are clo&s;e&s;t to the rule of the Word, all will &s;ay (in your phra&s;e) <HI>that they give fully as much as any, to the Magi&s;trate as God in his Word giveth them; and &s;o cannot be more or le&s;&s;e.</HI> And for our own parts, to wa&s;h our own hearts from &s;ini&s;ter intentions, we wi&s;h a cur&s;e upon tho&s;e de|&s;ignes, that &s;hall flatter men to facilitate a forming, and winding in of a Di&s;cipline that &s;hall not be the clo&s;e&s;t to the Scriptures.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 17. No &s;ooner is <HI>the Prelaticall party by the power and ble&s;&s;ing of God begun to be &s;ubdued in this I&s;land, but ari&s;eth unexpect|edly the oppo&s;ition on the other hand, waiting the opportunity, &s;tronger then it was before, which moved &s;ome of our Divines of late to write on this hand in defence of the government of the reformed Churches, as others had done before them in other Churches.</HI> In France Beza <HI>again&s;t</HI> Morelius Sadeel. <HI>Two Nationall Synods al&s;o of the reformed Churches in</HI> France, <HI>the one at</HI> Orleans, 1561. <HI>Another at</HI> Rochel, 1571.</P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> It &s;hould &s;eem by your own quotations here that long before your <HI>No &s;ooner,</HI> &amp;c. not &s;taying to <HI>wait this opportunitie,</HI> lear|ned and godly men have written, neer an hundred yeers &s;ince again&s;t Cla&s;&s;icall Presbyteries, and for Congregationall Chur|ches. Be&s;ides tho&s;e many worthy famous men which you quote with honour in your Peaceable Plea. As for Mr. <HI>Beza</HI> again&s;t <HI>Morelius Sadeel,</HI> his Tract is not at hand, and therefore we can|not now &s;peak to it particularly, But this you know, that an ho|ne&s;t <HI>Aerius</HI> a Presbyter is condemned by a pious and learned <HI>Epi|phanius</HI> as guiltie of here&s;ie, for &s;aying <HI>that a Bi&s;hop did not differ from a Presbyter, but that a Presbyter was as high in dignity and order as the Bi&s;hop</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Quid e&s;t E|pi&s;copus ad Presbyterum? Nihil hic dif|fert ab illo, unus enim e&s;t ordo, &amp; unus (inquit) ho|nor, &amp; una dignitas. Im|ponit manus Epi&s;copus? ita etiam Presby|ter, &amp;c. Epip. contra haere&s;. li. <HI>3.</HI> To. <HI>1.</HI> ca. <HI>75.</HI></NOTE>. <HI>That to celebrate the Pa&s;&s;eover was Jewi&s;h. That the prayers of the l<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ving did not profit the dead. That their ordained &s;et Fa&s;ts Quarta &amp; pro Sabbato were not to be ob&s;erved.</HI> Yet the &s;ame <HI>Epiphanius</HI> (who
<PB N="12" REF="7" MS="y"> flouri&s;hed about the yeer 365. after Chri&s;t, &s;o long &s;ince) confe&s;|&s;eth, that <HI>Aerius was not alone in this opinion, but multitudes more, keep|ing together (in form of a particular Church) with the &s;aid Aerius,</HI><NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg">Magnam multitudi|nem virorum ac mulierum allexit. Fugabatur autem ip&s;e cum &s;uis ab Eccle&s;iis, &amp; agris, ac vicis, ac civitati|bus. Saepe vero cum multa &s;ua tur|ba vigilantes ac &s;obrii in agris dege|bant.</NOTE> <HI>their Teacher, all of them living very &s;oberly.</HI> For the two Synods you men|tion, for want of copies of them (nor do we in this bu&s;ine&s;&s;e de|&s;ire much to turn over books, but take what is ready at hand, un|le&s;&s;e hereafter we &s;hall be forced thereunto) we &s;hall &s;peak but a word in generall; that as one of the be&s;t of our Engli&s;h Articles tell us, <HI>Councels have and may erre,</HI> therefore Synods. If <HI>Paphnutius</HI> were alive, he could tell us by experience. Chri&s;ts enlightning and leading pre&s;ence is much according to the orderly gathering and managing of Synods. And for the Prote&s;tant Churches in <HI>France;</HI> If we may beleeve our eares hearing the reports of &s;ome of the Mini&s;ters of the French Churches here in England (con&s;i|derable too as the Dutch) or our eyes in reading the Eccle&s;ia&s;ti|call Di&s;cipline of the reformed Churches in France, many mate|riall particulars, and pa&s;&s;ages are for us; which we omit here, as not intending a di&s;pute or largene&s;&s;e in any thing. So that if things be weighed we are not &s;o alone, or heterogeneall, as that we de&s;erve the opinion that we &s;hould not be for the <HI>Reformed Churches</HI> &s;o far forth as they be <HI>reformed,</HI> at lea&s;t as much as the <HI>Presbyterians.</HI></P>
<P>To tho&s;e intimations of Reform. pag. 19. that the Apologizers <HI>exile was voluntary;</HI> they carried away <HI>Churches with them, and left the other Churches,</HI> that &s;tayed behind, <HI>expo&s;ed to the enemie;</HI> The Apol. hath no more to &s;ay at this time, but this. That their <HI>exile</HI> at mo&s;t was but as <HI>voluntary,</HI> as the Seamens<NOTE N="*" PLACE="marg"><HI>Voluntate mixta &s;emi|plena,</HI> with an unwil|ling will.</NOTE> ca&s;ting their lading into the Sea, to &s;ave them&s;elves from drowning. They took no more then Chri&s;t gave them: when they <HI>per&s;ecute you in one place, fly into another, as Chri&s;t and his parents did.</HI> And they did no more ex|po&s;e the Church to the enemie, then as in all ages other godly Colonies of Saints have done in departing to <HI>Francfort, Holland,</HI> and <HI>New England,</HI> le&s;t they them&s;elves al&s;o had been &s;wallowed up too, and the other Churches never an <HI>iota</HI> relieved by it; but kept them&s;elves for a re&s;erve, to a&s;&s;i&s;t the Church at their return. Hoping that if they were blamed for their <HI>voluntary departing,</HI> they &s;hall not for their <HI>voluntary return;</HI> to <HI>unexpo&s;e</HI> the Church to the lea&s;t claw, or &s;hadow of Prelacy.</P>
<P>Reformat. p. 21. <HI>To limit the cen&s;ure of excommunication, in matter
<PB N="13" REF="7" MS="y"> of opinion</HI> to the common and uncontroverted principles,<NOTE PLACE="marg">The true copy of the Apology is thus. Excom|munication we iudge &s;hould be put in exe|cution for no other kind of &s;ins, th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">n may evidently be pre&s;umed to be perpetrated again&s;t the pa<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ties known light, as whe|ther it be a &s;in in manners &amp; conver&s;ation, &s;uch as is com|mitted again&s;t the light of na|ture, or the common recei|ved practi&s;es of Chri&s;tianity profe&s;&s;ed in the Church of Chri&s;t. Or if in opinion, then &s;uch as are likewi&s;e con|trary to <GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">he re|ceived prin|ciples of Chri|&s;tianity, &amp; the power of god|lines profe&s;&s;ed by the party him&s;elf, &amp; uni|ver&s;ally ac|knowledged in all th<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter"> re&s;t of the Chur|ches, and no oth<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">r &s;ins to be the &s;ubiect of that dreadfull &s;<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ntence.</NOTE> and in the matter of manners to the common and univer&s;all practi&s;es of Chri&s;tianitie, and in both to the parties known light, <HI>is the dangerous d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ctrine of the Arminians, and Socinians, openeth a wide doore, and proclaimeth liberty to all other practi&s;es and errours which are not fun|damentall, and univer&s;ally abhorred by all Chri&s;tians, and tendeth to the overthrow of the Reformed Religion, which we wi&s;h all &s;ound and &s;ober &s;pirits to ab&s;tain from, le&s;t it render them and their profe&s;&s;ion &s;u&s;pected of &s;ome &s;uch opinions and practi&s;es, as in charitie we judge to be far from their minds and wayes.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> If <HI>Pagans</HI> and <HI>Infidels</HI> do not practi&s;e, and <HI>Papi&s;ts, Pre|lates, Socinians, Arminians, Browni&s;ts, Separati&s;ts, &amp;c.</HI> do not hold &s;ome common truths with Chri&s;tians (as &s;ence is common to men and bea&s;ts) we cannot but condoll our condition, that when we a&s;&s;ert (again&s;t mi&s;-opinion of us) that we give to Magi&s;trates as much as the Presbyterians do, we are compared to <HI>Pagans, In|fidels, Prelates,</HI> &amp;c. as bringing the way of Chri&s;t into hate with Princes: when we &s;peak for a conforming of Church govern|ment to the clo&s;e&s;t agreement with the Scriptures, we are compa|red to <HI>Browni&s;ts, Separati&s;ts, Independents,</HI> and <HI>Popular Anarchie.</HI> When we judge that excommunication &s;hould not be but of per|&s;ons pre&s;umed to &s;in again&s;t their own light, &amp;c. we are compa|red to <HI>Socinians</HI> and <HI>Arminians,</HI> if not &s;emi-&s;u&s;pected to be &s;uch, though not by any Engli&s;h heart. If the&s;e be right forms of con|futation, the common people will begin to pride up them&s;elves as to have &s;aid &s;omewhat to the Que&s;tion now in controver&s;ie, whiles they a&s;&s;ert (in&s;tead of better arguments) <HI>that a Bi&s;hop is a Presbytery contracted; and a Presbytery is a Bi&s;hop d<GAP DESC="illegible" RESP="KEYERS" EXTENT="1 letter">ffu&s;ed.</HI> The former is as a pre&s;ident; the other as a Commi&s;&s;ion exerci&s;ed by many. Doth not this very particular of excommunication te&s;tifie for us that the Congregational way doth leave more to the Magi&s;trate, then the Presbyterie do? Many offences are to be puni&s;hed <HI>bodily,</HI> by the Civill Magi&s;trate, that are not to be cen&s;ured with that <HI>&s;pirituall</HI> highe&s;t cen&s;ure of Excommunication. Which being a <HI>&s;hutting out of heaven,</HI> and <HI>a giving up to Satan,</HI> had need of better grounds then mens &s;inning of &s;implicitie, or ignorance. The very Prelates, at lea&s;t pretended wilfull ob&s;tinacy for their Excommu|nications. And the great puni&s;hment of Excommunication in|flicted for &s;mall faults, will make the puni&s;hment at la&s;t &s;mall in
<PB N="14" REF="8"> the eyes of men. But if it be re&s;trained to great faults again&s;t the parties light, men will think the puni&s;hment to be like the &s;in. And yet no do are &s;et open to other vices; which Civil power may puni&s;h <HI>externally</HI> for the fact; whiles Churches look upon faults <HI>&s;piritually</HI> in relation to the mind, with what <HI>will</HI> they were committed.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 23. <HI>Two maine objections are made again&s;t the prin|ciples and practi&s;e of the order and government of the Reformed Churches. One is that there is no need of authoritative power of Presbyteries, and Sy|nods, and that the exhortation of particular Churches one to another, the Prote&s;tation of one again&s;t another, and the withdrawing of communion one from another, may be a &s;ufficient remedie, and no le&s;&s;e effectuall again&s;t all offences then Excommunication it &s;elf; e&s;pecially if the Magi&s;trate &s;hall vouch&s;afe his a&s;&s;i&s;tance, and interpo&s;e his authoritie, for &s;trengthning the &s;entence of</HI> Non communion.</P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> There is not one word in the Apologies di&s;cour&s;e of this point to extenuate the power of <HI>Synods;</HI> which being accor|ding to the Scriptures, they hold them in the highe&s;t e&s;teeme that ever the Scripture advanced them to. And on the other &s;ide, they there give us an expre&s;&s;e, that be&s;ides the &s;aid exhortations, prote&s;tations, and Non communion, that they profe&s;&s;e them|&s;elves ever to &s;ubmit, and al&s;o to be mo&s;t willing to have recour&s;e to the civill Magi&s;trate interpo&s;ing a power of another nature, upon his particular cognizance, and examination of &s;uch cau&s;es.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 21. 22. <HI>To the &s;aid objection we an&s;wer,</HI> 1 (for there are 5 an&s;wers by way of direct confutation) <HI>that this objection &s;uppo&s;eth a ca&s;e, which hath not been found in the Church of Scotland for the &s;pace of eightie yeers, and beleeve was never heard of in any of the Re|formed Churches, except tho&s;e of the</HI> Separation: <HI>the pronouncing of Non communion or Excommunication against a whole Church. Our Excommu|nication hath been executed but &s;eldome again&s;t particular members, never again&s;t a whole Church, and we think never &s;hall be; and therefore this imaginarie fear of that which never falleth out, is not con&s;iderable, rules are made for ordinarie, and u&s;uall ca&s;es.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> Who that have &s;eriou&s;ly read and weighed the Apo|logie, and therein their di&s;claiming of the Separation properly &s;o called, their owning the Churches of Scotland and many in England for true Churches, their ju&s;t account of their practi&s;e in Holland, and their proceedings towards the Church mi&s;taking,
<PB N="15" REF="8" MS="y"> would after all this call the Apologizers Churches, <HI>Churches of the Separation;</HI> unle&s;&s;e withall they expre&s;t they meant Separation from the Prelates wayes, as Scotland and England now do. But what ever true Churches be named, we &s;ee no rea&s;on (though others beleeve <HI>quod factum non e&s;t, nec fieri pote&s;t;</HI> that which never hath been, never &s;hall be) but that they may be incident and li|able to fall into that ca&s;e of having to do with a whole parti|cular Church erring; e&s;pecially till tho&s;e &s;warmes of <HI>Anabapti&s;ts, Antinomians,</HI> &amp;c. which have been &s;o oft intimated and &s;ounded in our eares, be allayd. You (brethren your &s;elves) &s;uppo&s;e more, and therefore you may &s;uppo&s;e the le&s;&s;e. For in your &s;econd an|&s;wer to this objection (as you call it) you &s;uppo&s;e that <HI>two, or more Churches may mutually prote&s;t and pronounce the &s;entence of non com|munion</HI> one again&s;t another. <HI>In which ca&s;e, &s;ay you, pronouncing of non communion would prove rather a meane of divi&s;ion, then of union, and there would be no remedy (where the cen&s;ure is mutuall) to compo&s;e this difference, unle&s;&s;e there be a common Presbytery, or Synod made up of the whole.</HI> To which we an&s;wer, that this ca&s;e hath befallen Provin|ces, and National prelaticall Churches, in matter of Excommu|nication too, each of them having a &s;everall Pope in them have excommunicated one another. And we &s;ee not that antidote in one of the wayes you mention, namely, a <HI>Cla&s;&s;icall Provinciall Pre&s;|bytery,</HI> but that one provinciall Presbytery may prote&s;t again&s;t and excommunicate the other. For the other way (for you pro|pound two, and we are willing to take the be&s;t) namely, a Na|tionall <HI>Synod,</HI> gathered and guided according to the Scriptures, we willingly embrace. And they that will not take the judge|ment of &s;uch a Synod, having no Scripture to alledge ju&s;tly, again&s;t their re&s;olutions, let them fall into the hands of the Ma|gi&s;trate, the Pre&s;erver of the publick peace. This &s;ame reply &s;erves to your third and fourth an&s;wer. We need adde but a word in reply to your fifth an&s;wer, wherein you demand by <HI>what proba|bility it can be made to appear to any rationall man, and indifferent mind, that no authoritie &s;hall be as valid as authoritie again&s;t the ob&s;tinate, that</HI> Via admonitionis &amp; requi&s;itionis <HI>is equall with</HI> Via citationis, &amp; publicae authoritatis? To which we an&s;wer, that if it be &s;tated that that is <HI>authoritie,</HI> which is Scripture authoritie (and not el&s;e) and that to be mo&s;t valid that convinceth and conquers <HI>actus eli|citos, the mind,</HI> rather then that which doth onely manacle and
<PB N="16" REF="9" MS="y"> con&s;traine, <HI>actus imperatos, the outward carriage;</HI> the demand is &s;oon an&s;wered. Is the way of admonition, prote&s;tation, and non com|munion, no authoritie? Is that no authoritie that tels us <HI>we mu&s;t give no offence, Better a mil&s;tone were hanged about ones neck, and he ca&s;t into the Sea, then to offend a weaker brother. That we were better not eat fle&s;h then to offend, &amp;c.</HI> Or is it no authoritie, when a whole Church after fa&s;ting and prayer, and clear di&s;putation, &s;hall tell the ob|&s;tinate erring, that upon tho&s;e grounds they will withdraw from them as <HI>from Heathens and Publicans?</HI> The truth is, that the pre|laticall men have made much u&s;e of this your ca&s;e alledged to plead for Bi&s;hops, as mo&s;t nece&s;&s;arie to keep Churches in union. But Gods authoritie held forth to us in the judgements of Na|tionall Synods according to the Word, will prove more effectu|all then any humane in&s;tituted way what&s;oever, to unite Churches.</P>
<P>Reformat. pag. 24. <HI>The other objection is; that by this authoritie and order of government, one Church hath power over another: which is contra|rie to that libertie and equalitie Chri&s;t hath endewed his Churches with, and is no other but a new prelaticall dominion &s;et over the Churches of Chri&s;t. To this (&s;ay you) we an&s;wer.</HI> 1 <HI>That we are far from impo&s;ing any &s;uch collaterall power. The power which we maintain is aggregative of the Officers of many Congregations over the particular members; in which (as in the naturall and politick body) one member is not &s;ubject to another, but is to the whole.</HI> 2 <HI>It is (&s;ay you) a mi&s;erable mi&s;take to compare Pre&s;|byteries and Prelates together. For the Courts of Prelates are altogether forrain and extrin&s;ecall to the Congregations, over which they rule. But the power of Presbyteries is intrin&s;ecall and naturall, they being con&s;titute of the Pa&s;tors and Elders of the particular Congregations ever which they are &s;et. So that another without them&s;elves doth not bear rule over them, but all of them by common con&s;ent do rule over every one; which is no more then for a member of a particular Congregation, to be ruled by his own particular Elder&s;hip. For they di&s;cern no &s;entence of excommunication of any mem|ber without the knowledge, and con&s;ent of the particular Congregation that is particularly concerned therein.</HI></P>
<P><HI>Apolog.</HI> You &s;ay you <HI>impo&s;e not a collaterall power.</HI> Sure your laws do impo&s;e that one congregation &s;hall be &s;ubject to the Elders (&s;uppo&s;e) of twenty congregations. And the authority of 19 of them is as <HI>collaterall.</HI> The congregations every one cho&s;e their own officers to rule over them&s;elves in the Lord. But we heare
<PB N="17" REF="9" MS="y"> not you &s;ay that they cho&s;e their Officers to rule over them&s;elves and others; though we hear you &s;ay that the Officers them&s;elves are readie enough to con&s;ent &s;o to rule: which is as extrin&s;ecall as Epi&s;copacie, if Epi&s;copacie be as intrin&s;ecall as Presbyterie. For are not Bi&s;hops cho&s;en by the people at their in&s;talment; where cu&s;tomarily people are allowed to make any ju&s;t excepti|on; and hath in part been practi&s;ed in England, though with little &s;ucce&s;&s;e in their domineering times? Ju&s;t as anciently, (as <HI>Hieronimus</HI> tels us) <HI>Vnus eligebatur qui caeteris preponoretur, &amp;c. To avoid &s;chi&s;me, one of the cla&s;&s;icall Presbytery was cho&s;en to be as Chair-man</HI> over them all in their Con&s;i&s;torie, who from being &s;o annually, at la&s;t became &s;o for his life time, and &s;o hence was born Epi&s;co|pacy. Be&s;ides we know that the Bi&s;hop and his Chaplains, Chancellour, Archdeacon, Regi&s;ter, &amp;c. were pari&s;hioners with|in their own Dioce&s;&s;e; if not Elders or Officers in their &s;everall congregations. And people formerly have been as willing they &s;hould reigne, as ever any people were in your Kingdom to have the Presbyterie over them. And the Bi&s;hops on the other &s;ide did as cunningly comply with the Congregations; they grounding their Court proceedings upon the Church-wardens or Pari&s;h Elders pre&s;entments upon the peoples complaints and te&s;timony, and did not pa&s;&s;e an Excommunication without the &s;ub&s;cription of the hand of a Mini&s;ter or two of that Archdeaconrie, or Coun|tie-Presbyterie; and la&s;t of all, the Excommunication was not pronounced without the con&s;ent of the Mini&s;ter of the particular Congregation. So that it is clear, it is not peoples con&s;ent onely, but if according to the Word, that makes a government lawfull. God hath chalked out to us patterns of people chu&s;ing Officers for the congregation. And congregations chu&s;ing men for Sy|nods or Councels, but not (as we conceive) of chu&s;ing men to make a middle cla&s;&s;icall Presbyterie. What ever plau&s;ible &s;hews of rea&s;on may &s;eem to commend a way, yet onely Gods way &s;hall have the ble&s;&s;ing of God upon it. And if it cannot be re&s;olved on all hands as yet, clearly which is it, let that your golden &s;peech be written upon all your actions.<NOTE PLACE="marg">&lindx;</NOTE> <HI>That tho&s;e that are mo&s;t aver&s;e to Presbytery if they allow no materiall difference in doctrine, wor&s;hip,</HI><NOTE PLACE="marg">Reform. p. <HI>26.</HI></NOTE> <HI>or pra|cti&s;e, might injoy their peace, and all comforts of their Mini&s;tery, and pro|fe&s;&s;ion under it, without controlment of that authoritative power which
<PB N="18" REF="10" MS="y"> they &s;o much apprehend.</HI> We have been of late made to fear the con|trary, by the reports of &s;ome (not of meane&s;t rank) of your own Nation, but now we de&s;ire rather to hope upon your words here given under your own hands, then fear by rea&s;on of theirs. Tru&s;t|ing al&s;o that as you were kindly invited to our A&s;&s;embly, &s;o you will be as helpfull to our poore <HI>Churches</HI> as your Armies by Gods ble&s;&s;ing are like to be the <HI>Common-wealth;</HI> according as both Na|tions have vowed <HI>to indeavour the reformation of Religion in the King|doms of England and Ireland in Doctrine, Wor&s;hip, Di&s;cipline, and Go|vernment, according to the Word of God.</HI></P>
<P><NOTE PLACE="marg">Reform. p. <HI>26.</HI></NOTE><HI>We crave leave to conclude with your own words, hoping we may as con|fidently &s;peak them as you did; namely,</HI> That &s;o much for the pre&s;ent have we &s;aid, not for confutation, but meerly for ju&s;tifying our own and other reformed Churches again&s;t &s;uch mi&s;-repre&s;ent|ings and mi&s;takings, as in matters of Religion are too frequent in this place, at this time, &amp;c.</P>
<TRAILER>FINIS.</TRAILER>
<PB REF="10">
</DIV1>
</BODY>
</TEXT>
</EEBO>
</ETS>
