AN INQVIRIE AND ANSWER Of Thomas White his Discovery of Brownisme.  
By Francis johnson Pastor of the exiled English Church at Amsterdam in Holland.  Psal. 55.12.13.14. 
surely mine enemy did not defame me: for I could have 〈◊〉 it: neither did mine adversary exalt himself against me: for I would have hid me from him.  
But it was thou▪ O man, even my companion, my guide, & my 〈…〉 Which delighted in consulting together, and went into the house 〈…〉 companions.  
1606.   

TO THE CHRISTIAN READER, grace and peace from Christ our Lord & Saviour.  
TWo sorts of adversaries, the Church still hath among men. The one, of such as be without: the other, of such as arise from within the Church itself. Both heavy enemies: but the latter, far the more grievous, many ways. By both of them have we (as others before us) been exercised, a long time, and in strange manner. Yet in and against them all, hath the Lord by his power and of his mercy hitherto preserved us, and I trust will so do unto the end.  
Of late hath risen up one Thomas White, despitefully reviling us, and wickedly blaspheming the Name and tabernacle of the Lord. A man, that was himself heretofore separated from the Church of England, holding the Prelacy Ministry worship and confusion thereof to be antichristian: Who also was a joined member of a Church in the West parts of England professing the same faith with us: And afterward coming over to Amsterdam, and desiring to be partaker of the Lords supper with us, did in our public meeting before us all, with his own mouth, testify his consent with us in the same faith we profess: From which he is now revolted: and of which he is become a notable adversary: setting himself tooth and nail (what he can) against us and our cause: and that both privately & publicly, as now himself hath manifested to the world.  
So as in himself (though it may seem strange) are found both the extremities, whereof he speaketh in his Preface, which bring no small annoyance to the Church of God, hypocrisy, and profaneness. His hypocrisy, now laid open, in the particulars aforesaid, and many other known unto us concerning him. His profaneness, plainly appearing, both in forsaking the truth of Christ (as Esau sold his birthright for a mess of pottage) and in oppugning it in this manner: 
Gen. 25.33.34. Heb. 12.16.  which showeth in him a despising, if not a despiting also of the truth: as Esau contemned the birthright, when he had sold it.  
And thus the instance, which he would falsely give in others, may fitly be observed in himself, for both the extremities aforesaid: As also that howsoever they seem to differ the one from the other, yet indeed they strengthen & harden each other, with a mutual reciprocation, and proceed also the one from the other, howsoever for a while envy do cloak itself under the name of zeal etc. Which that it may yet the better appear both in and from himself, I will here set down a letter of his, written while he held our cause, to a Minister of the Church of England: And (to use his own words) as Christ alleged against the Pharisees, 
Whites Discov. pag. 4.  the example of their own children, that they might be their judges: so will I against himself his own writing & dealing, that they (as his children) may be his judges. The letter is this which followeth, taken from his own original copy.  
A letter written by Thomas White, to Mr I. A. Minister at M. in Wiltshire.  Ps. 7.9.59.2.140.5. 
Oh let the malice of the wicked come to an end, but guide thou the just. Deliver me from the wicked doers, and save me from the bloody men. The proud have laid a snare for me, and spread a net with cords in my pathway, and set grins for me. Selah.  
Sir, the pillars of the kingdom of darkness have been especially three, ignorance, falsehood, and violence. How far yourself have waded with others in these, in your late dealing against us, by sermons conference & letters, let the sequel show.  
1. For the first, you in conference at W.W. would undertake to prove the reading Ministry to be a true Ministry, 
Ignorance.  though you refused to justify your own, and that by this argument. Whosoever preaches the Gospel is a true Minister, but the reading Minister preach the Gospel, Therefore a true Minister.  
For answer to your argument, I denied the first proposition, especially in that sense as you took preaching for any publishing of the Gospel, which you presently left without defence. But if the reading Ministry be a true Ministry, then is it the ordinance of God, and if it be the ordinance of God, then may not the Magistrate remove such a Ministry under any pretence without sin. An ignorant Proctor, for an ignorant Ministry, an unfit time for such a doctrine of desolation, to keep darkness still in the Land, when the Lord hath shaken his sword against it.  
2. Your ignorance further appears in the expounding of the parable you entreated on Math. 13.24.1. In expounding (field) for the Church, when as, though there by (kingdom of heaven) be meant the Church, yet by (field) must be meant the world, for the kingdom of heaven is in the (field) except the Church should be in the Church, or our Saviour's exposition were untrue, verse 38. where field is expounded to be the world. 2. In that you would undertake to expound a dark parable not by plain places of Scripture, but contrary to the tenor of the Scriptures, and ordinance of God both in Church & common wealth, for if by (tars) be meant open offenders, which may not be plucked up, then may not open offenders be cast out in the Church, nor put to death by the Magistrate.  
3. You said in conference that all that preached the Gospel, Act. 8.4. had extraordinary gifts, which you went about thus to prove. Philip. Act. 8.5. had extraordinary gifts, therefore all the rest had. Which argument you could not then nor ever will be able to prove, the very recital of it is sufficient answer unto it.  
4. And your insufficiency was even confessed by 
* Mr Sedg. to Mr Pow.  one of your own fellows (as I heard) who when he heard that you were to preach on that parable, said that he marveled that you would undertake it being so unfit: he would some more sufficient man would undertake it: with many such words tending to the like effect.  
Thus have you showed yourself not alone ignorant, & so acknowledged after a sort by some of yourselves, but also are become an upholder and pleader for darkness in others. But if your dealing had been alone of ignorance your fault had not been so great, but you have added falsehood & deceit thereunto, as may appear:  
1. In that you were not ashamed openly in the pulpit (which you made the chair of falsehood) to teach that excommunication had no ground from the 18. of Math. contrary to the coherence, drift, circumstances, consequence of that scripture, 
Falsehood.  & by conference also with other Scriptures: as shallbe showed if you will undertake the defence of your own doctrine. In that scripture is showed a power which Christ hath given to his Church, ver. 17.20. for the removing out of their communion, ver. 17. such as remain unrepentant and obstinate in their sins, ver. 16.17. and therefore excommunication. To what end should this doctrine tend, if not to bereave the Church of that power which Christ hath left for the sweeping of uncleanness out of the house of God. But this shall be further showed, from whose breasts you sucked this poisoned milk, which now you give others to drink: if you will not leave the doctrine to the wide world without defence.  
2. In that you trussed up another false doctrine on the same Scripture, that the party offender Mat. 18.17. should be an heathen & publican only to the party first offended, not to the whole Church: When as the whole Church hath as much cause to be offended as the party that was first offended, yea & more cause than that party had at first to be offended, by reason of the continuance in his sin, which the offender hath added to his former sin. If you had understood what had been meant by (trespass, verse 15) you would not have thus abused this Scripture: as may also be further showed. In this point, one of your Ministers, 
Mr ●●.  but of greater wisdom & discretion then yourself hath signified his contrary judgement to you thereon (as I have heard) as knowing I doubt not the falsehood and vanity of your assertion thereon. Yea I dare undertake that many of your our own Ministers of best reformed judgements, will be ashamed of these black drops which falls from your lips.  
3. In that you published in like sort that though open offenders did communicate with true Christians, yet were they not defiled thereby, traducing Mr john's: 〈◊〉 affirming the contrary. And yet when you came to the trial of it in conference between you and myself, you said your meaning was of a true Christian in the sight of God, not of a true Christian in the sight of men, as he is a member of the visible Church, and that such a Christian could not sin or be defiled with sin in that he was regenerate or borne of God, which was never the question between us, and so a true Christian did not sin though he should commit Idolatry, Adultery, or the like, in that sense that you took sinning: Yea a true Christian might as much be defiled with sin in communicating with open offenders, as by committing adultery, for any thing you have said in that conference, which is under your hand. This was your miserable shifting, I fear against the light of your conscience. Yet Mr jes. a few days after, in a conference between Mr Pow. and himself at Mr Bayl. on the same question took it in an other sense, yea in that sense, as which you said you meant not, neither could I bring you unto it, as may appear in that conference. Such confusion of languages doth well become the builders of Babel.  
4. For that in your letter to Mr St. S.W.W.N. dated the 20. of jan: 1603. you would undertake, though no other would assist you, yet yourself, by word, or writing, or howsoever, against whomsoever, to justify your ministery, doctrine, etc. and yet by word in conferring you refused to justify your Ministry, when you were provoked thereunto: yea when I offered to prove it false in those particulars you mentioned, and to be separated from. I offered also to prove your doctrine false on the 18. of Mat. and 13. of Mat. but you refused. I desired that I might propose one argument concerning the question between us, but you would deal no further, except you might put down some proof further of that which we never doubted of: viz: that a true Christian in the sight of God did not sin in the regenerate part as he was borne of God. Was this timorous & fearful dealing answerable to your bombasted boastings, let others judge. These be the doctrines of desolation which you do scatter: Let others now judge what cause we have to account you a false prophet, and they in miserable case that are led by such blind guides. Did you not tremble to wish in the pulpit that the Lord would stop your mouth if you spoke not the truth. Your dealing hath confirmed us, and been a means (through God's goodness) to gain others to the truth we profess, and for yourself remember seeing you care not what you teach, nor how you take the name of God in vain, that which is written, jon. 2.8. that they that wait upon lying vanities forsake their own mercy.  
3. And yet lest the measure of your iniquity were not full already, 
Violence.  you add violence & persecution to your former evil dealing. When you are not able to stand by the word you try whether you can suppress us by the sword. ¹ Yourself would not suffer Mr Pow. to make answer to you at Slaughtens. fearing lest your falsehood should be discovered thereby. ² Afterward Mr jes. by letters entreated him not to make you answer publicly, that you might speak what you would without controlment. ³ And seeing these means would not prevail, yourself to show whose servant you are, with others went up again & again as if much pains had been too little to procure a warrant to attach him, & Will. We. told Mr Pow. that Mr Aw. was the procurer of the warrant. Thus do you by falsehood & violence seek to uphold your ruinated kingdom, when truth & verity hath forsaken her. And you show yourself in deed to be an Edomite, red with blood, Ob. 1.10. like the scarlet coloured beast, who hath a mouth like a Dragon. ⁴ Your associate Mr At. could tell me, that an other place was fitter for me, meaning the prison▪ To whom I answered, that if I had the gift of dissembling which he had, to subscribe against my conscience as he did (I told him then when & where) I might live long enough, & enjoy achan's wedge, as himself doth without abridgement of liberty. You of all others may be ashamed to dissemble thus with the Prelates, knowing how basely you have thought & spoke of them: ⁵ You Mr Aw. could call us brethren, & afterward being urged for your dissembling, you could expound your meaning that it was in respect of creation: and so cain, Ishmael; & Antichrist, be your brethren too, yea & nearer of kin then so, by persecution too. ⁶ Yourself could say not long since, that of all sects on some conditions you could soonest join to us, as being nearest the truth: & yet a little after call us rebels: but rebellion being a high degree of treason, yourself if you conceal it 24. hours will incur the danger thereof, look you to it. ⁷ You promised by writing to put down reasons to justify your ministery, and doctrine between us conferred of, but we thought before how slack we should find you in performance. At your next coming to Slaughtens. I pray you not to spend an hour and half in confuting us in proving that we never denied, as you did before, & not to contradict yourself as Mr jes. did, disproving his own doctrine the same time that he repeated it. The doctrine was that whosoever was reputed to be a Minister & taught the doctrine in the foundation sound he was a true Minister, and yet in the same place at the same time he said that a non Resident was a thief and a robber. Now I hope he will confess that a non resident is reputed by them to be a Minister and may teach the doctrine in the foundation sound, therefore a thief and a robber may be a true Pastor, (or else he disproved his own doctrine) which cannot be. With grief of heart I assure you I write these things, having been sometimes persuaded that you had more conscience, and true knowledge of God then can be perceived in this dealing. Thus have I given you a taste of your evil dealing, the Lord give you true remorse at the sight of your sin, or else remember that which Mr Fox hath written of the terrible end of persecutors. If you have any thing to say in answer, do not snatch here and there as your manner is, but directly and orderly justify these doctrines which are laid to your charge as false. Thus as before, so still committing our cause to the just judge, I take my leave: this present the 25. of Mon. 2. 1603.  
He that desireth your good from his heart. Tho. White.  
This letter he wrote, as is aforesaid. Since which time, being here discovered and disappointed of his expectation, he hath with Demas embraced this present world, and left the truth of Christ: & is become a sworn enemy thereof himself, and a pleader for like fruits of darkness in others. Will he now therefore behold himself in his own glass, and not forget what manner a one he is, but apply to himself his own speeches, of the pillars of darkene●, of making the pulpit the chair of falsehood, of abusing the Scripture, of black drops falling from his lips, of miserable shifting against the light of his conscience, of confusion of language and building up Babel, of bombasted boastings, of doctrines of desolation, of false Prophets & blind guides, of waiting on lying vanities & forsaking his own mercy, of seeking to uphold the Beasts ruinated kingdom, of being an Edomite, of having a mouth like a Dragon, of the gift of dissembling, of enjoying achan's wedge, of base thinking & speaking of the Prelates heretofore, of being now near a kin to Cain, Ishmael, & Antichrist, of the terrible end of persecutors, of committing our cause to the just judge, etc.  
And how would he reply again, if Mr A. to whom he wrote this letter, should now answer him by the words of his own mouth out of his Libel against us, & ask him, Are these things evil in others & good in him? Or as the Poet speaks, 
Whites Discov. pag. 20.  justum non justum non justum justum quod vobis libet: Or will he say as Medea in Ovid, Video meliora proboque, deteriora sequor? But rather will he hear the Apostle, Rom. 2.1.3. What art thou that condennest another, & dost the same? Or the Prophet, Psal. 50.16. Why takest thou my word in thy mouth, and hatest to be reform? Or Christ himself, Hypocrite first cast the beam out of thine own eye, etc. Mat. 7.5.  
Or if he will hear none of these, yet let him remember & take to himself his own allegation of Tully's words, Testimonium tuum quod in aliena re leve est, 
Whites Discov. pag. 6.  hoc contra te grave, etc. Thine own testimony, which in another case is of small weight, this against thyself is of great moment.  
Now of his hatred & malice against us & the truth (since he left it) what should I need to speak? Himself hath proclaimed it to the world. And howsoever he would cloak & cover it with pretence of discharging his duty to God & his Churches, of care for others, of omitting many the vilest things, of offending chaste ears, of sparing us, etc. yet doth he therein but the more verify that saying of Solomon, Hatred may be covered by deceit: 
Pro. 26.26.  but the malice thereof shall be discovered in the congregation. Shemei himself, yea and Rabshakeh, could beside other things pretend even the name of God, when they railed & cursed most bitterly. Wherein also what other thing hath he done in his invective against us, but as the Jesuits and other Papists have often done against Luther, Calvine, Beza, etc. of whom they shame not to forge and publish notorious lies & slanders: and all to obscure the truth professed by them? Whose steps how this enemy of ours hath followed, let others judge. And let himself remember his own saying heretofore, if he will regard no others, that a man who hath run away from his Master, will seldom give him a good report.  
But thus is he the fitter servant for his Masters the Prelates, by whose authority he pleaded here before the Magistrates that his book was printed: and under them belike hopeth to be sheltered in England, whither he hath now betaken himself: for what cause he knoweth best. But wheresoever and howsoever he bestow himself, let him know, God will find him out: from whom he cannot fly, nor escape his judgement. For as Enoch the seventh from Adam prophesied, so is it in all ages to be remembered, Behold, the Lord cometh with his thousands of Saints, to do judgement against all men, & to rebuke all the ungodly of them, of all the works of vngod●ynes which they have ungodly committed, and of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. Jude, ver. 14.15.  
For which cuase, we could for our own parts so have left him, & born in our bosom all his reproach, without giving any answer: had we not considered that by him not only ourselves but even the faith of Christ which we profess is traduced and oppugned; and many that are weak might thus be kept or turned away from the truth; and Solomon saith, He that is first in his own cause, 
Prov. 18.17.  is just, till his neighbour come and make inquiry of him. Therefore thought we it best at this time to make the answer ensuing. Wherein as now we have followed the counsel & rule of wisdom, which saith, Answer a fool according to his foolishness, 
Pro. 26.5.  lest he be wise in his own eyes: so for hereafter (unless there be great & special occasion to the contrary) we may the better follow the other counsel and rule which Wisdom in the same place teacheth, saying, Answer not a fool according to his foolishness, lest thou also be like him: 
Prov. 26.4.  And specially for this man, who hath not delight in understanding, 
Prov. 18.2.  but that his heart may be discovered: whom God hath already made a spectacle to others of heady, contentious, and hostile opposition against the faith and witnesses of jesus.  
Neither let him or any other of our enemies think their case the better, because of our sins or troubles or weak walking in the faith, whereon they do so much insist. Concerning which, my answer shall be with the words of the Prophet, Rejoice not against me, 
Micah. 7.8.9.10.  o mine enemy: though I fall, I shall arise: when I sit in darkness, the Lord shall be a light unto me. I will bear the wrath of the Lord, because I have sinned against him, until he plead my plea, & execute judgement for me: he will bring me forth to the light, I shall see his righteousness. And he will look upon mine enemy, and cover her with shame, which said unto me, Where is the Lord thy God? Mine eyes shall look upon her, now shall she be trodden down as the mire in the streets. And in this will we rest, and wait upon the Lord the God of our salvation: trusting in him, that notwithstanding our unworthiness and his chastising which we have deserved, yet he will look upon us in mercy, and make all things work for good unto us in Christ: And that thus the uttermost opposition of all our enemies (howsoever they set themselves against us, whether against our cause or against our persons, against our faith or our walking in it) shall turn to our good, & to the furtherance of the truth witnessed by us: which we have much found that adversaries of all sorts have a long time and many ways oppugned, as they yet daily do and cease not: though all in vain. For great is the truth, and will prevail: and greater is he that is with us than they all that are against us. To him be praise and glory for ever and ever. Amen.  Esay 54, 15.16.17. 
Behold, he shall gather together, but without me: whosoever shall gather himself in thee, against thee, shall fall.  
Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and him that bringeth forth an instrument for his work, and I have created the stroyer to destroy.  
But all the weapons that are made against thee, shall not prosper: and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgement, thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the Lords servants, and their righteousness is of m●▪ saith the Lord.   

AN INQVIRIE AND ANSWER Of Thomas White his Discovery of Brownisme, or (as he calleth it also) his declaration of some of the errors and abominations daily practised & increased among the English company of the separation remaining for the present at Amsterdam in Holland.  
TO any that are exercised in the word of God, or know the nature and power of sin in themselves, or the doctrine & pledges of remission of sins by Ch●ist in his Church, or the power & use of excommunication for impenitent sinners, or the Church's duty upon their repentance to receive them again, etc. To any such (I say) it cannot seem strange, that in true Churches and Christians, sins & enormities, sundry and great, should fall out & be found. The condition of the Church of the jews before Christ, of the Primitive Churches after Christ, yea of the whole Church and people of God from the beginning of the world to this day, show it plainly and certainly so to have been.  
Which work of God so disposing, and case of his Churches and the members thereof so being, howsoever many have stumbled thereat & abused it to their own destruction & deceiving of others, yet thus would God preach unto the world and have his own people learn and lay to heart other & better things thereby. As namely, how sinful & miserable we are in ourselves; how subtly and continually Satan seeketh to devour us; how fast we had need alway to hold faith in Christ, and to fight the good fight thereof against all enemies of our salvation and obedience; how needful it is to live in the Church of Christ under his conduct and government; how careful we had need be to make an end of our own salvation with fear & trembling; also how exceeding great the mercy of God is unto us in Christ his Son, by whom not only when we were enemies we were reconciled to God by his death, but being also reconciled are saved by his life; and finally how infinite his power & wisdom is both in preserving his elect to salvation through the midst of so great corruption, and in bringing the ways of the wicked upon their own heads to their just destruction: and all to the praise & glory of his Name.  
These and the like good uses may & should we make of the foresaid condition of the Church here on earth. Neither did we ever think or profess otherwise of ourselves, but that we are sinful & prone to evil in ourselves aswell as others, obtaining salvation only by jesus Christ. Yet may not our or any weakness of man prejudice the truth of God. So that admitting it were with us as this Adversary Thomas White hath written against us, yet ought none therefore to be turned away from the truth professed by us, but to make other use thereof, for their own good, as we ourselves also ought. But now if the things he objecteth, be many of them notorious lies, diverse of them purposely perverted, few of them truly related, and all of them (as all may see) maliciously abused against us: how justly shall that return upon his own head, which he would in ●his manner bring upon us? according as it is said, He that diggeth a pit shall fall therein, and he that roleth a stone, it shall return upon him. His mischief shall return upon his own head, and his injury shall descend upon his own pate. Prov. 26.27. Psal. 7.15.16.  
TO come to the Libel itself: he beginneth it with blasphemy, in the very title thereof, calling it A discovery of Brownisme. What our cause and testimony is, we have long since published in the Confession of our faith: which this man knoweth well, & hath 
(a) Wh. Discovery. pag. 5·  in his book alleged the 17. Article thereof. If then he take our cause (for which we are reviled under the name of Brownists) to be error, why did he not confute it? If it be the truth, why doth he thus blaspheme it? But so to be reproached, hath been 
* Act. 24.5. & 28.22.  the case of the Apostles and Christians of old. And at this day are the Protestants thus dealt with by the Papists, who blaspheme the truth under the name of Zuinglianisme, Lutheranisme, Calvinisme, etc. And well it fitteth the Priests of England, that as they partake with the Papists in so many other things, they should also follow their steps in blaspheming the truth and witnesses thereof.  
That which he annexeth, calling his book also A declaration of some of the erroes and abominations among us, as it enlargeth the title of his Book, so it increaseth the wickedness of his sin. For may not the Reader hereby gather, that he would persuade, either that we hold and have many other errors & abominations besides them that here he imputeth unto us, or that all our cause and testimony is nothing else but error and abomination? As also when he saith, the errors and abominations be daily practised & increased: And that not only in some particular persons, but even among the company of the separation, (and as he speaketh in his Preface) in that congregation wherein he would give his instance of profaneness and hypocrisy. This congregation he nameth to be the English company of the separation remaining for the present at Amsterdam. Where the Reader is to know, that we who by some are termed Brownists (of a man's name who heretofore witnessed this cause) are by others called the company of the separation, because we do separate from the Prelacy, Priesthood, worship & Confusion of the Church of England as being Antichristian, & do also practise the ordinance of Christ which he hath given for the government ministry worship and order of his Church.  
THis for the Title. Like thereunto is his Treatise also. Where for his general accusations of debate, malice, adulteries, cousonages, and other enormities, etc. this may serve in general to be answered: 1. If he mean of some particular persons among us, falling into such sins, it hath been and is the case of all the Churches of Christ upon earth, as may be seen in those of Corinth, Galatia, Ephesus, etc. And what need or use else should there be of the rules & power given by Christ to his Church for casting out obstinate sinners, 
Mat. 18.15 17.18.22. Luke 17.4. 1 Cor. 5.1.4.5.11.12.13.  and receiving the repentant in again? But if he mean of the body of the Church, as if we approved or retained such being convinced & unrepentant, himself knoweth it is a malicious slander, and his own objections (afterward in his book) of sundry persons whom for their sins and obstinacy therein we have cast out from among us, may show it also to others so to be. We are careful (he hath seen it himself) that such be not retained or allowed among us. And we find that even our carefulness herein is abused against us: because when any of us are known to have fallen into sin and are dealt with according as the case requireth, whether they repent & so remain in the Church, or whether they persist in their evil and so are cut of, it is still objected against us, and we are published to abound with such sins & enormities. Thus might the best Churches that ever w●re in the world be traduced: as hereafter there is further occasion to show in some particulars.  
2. For ourselves (as I said before) we confess, and profess it also, that we are subject to sin and infirmity, as other men: looking for salvation, not by our own righteousness which is of the Law, but only by the righteousness which is of God, through the faith of Christ. Yet, notwithstanding all the sins and unworthiness of us, let this still be held firm (at least till we be sound confuted) that our cause is the truth of the Gospel of Christ, witnessed against the errors of the defection of Antichrist.  
3. The accusations made against us, are to be considered with their proofs: which will afterward come to be seen. In the mean time, let it be observed, whether if some would set themselves to collect particular instances of debate, malice, adulteries, cousonages, & such other like enormities, daily committed by many in the Church whereunto this man is now revolted, though they wrote no untruths (as he doth many) but noted only the truth of things as they are indeed, neither took the space of thirteen or fourteen years (as he hath done) but of any one year among them, how might they fill, I will not say a few sheeds of paper, but even many volumes of books therewith?  
And if T. White were asked according to his own words here, whether he had not himself partaken with their abominations & unfruitful works of darkness: and whether he would give warning to others of their leaders evil dealing, whereby their people are devoured: would he not think you verify his own other sayings here, showing himself to be far from repentance, seeking to cover, hide, cloak, reproach and revile, using falsehood, shift, contrarieties, etc. All which are known to be so true and common both in himself and the Church whereto he is returned as I need not write thereof at all: their estate & dealing proclaim it to all that h●ue ears to hear and hearts to regard it.  
Our banishment & poverty (whereof he speaketh) increaseth his & their sin against us yet much the more. For are not they the persons that bring these afflictions upon us? and is it not only because we witness the truth of our Lord jesus Christ, against the falsehood of Antichrist yet remaining among them, in the ministry worship order & government of their Church? But let them know that he which judgeth justly the sons of men, 
Esa. 16.4. Psal. 103.6  will remember his banished, and execute justice and judgement to all that are oppressed. For the poor shall not alway be forgotten, nor the hope of the afflicted perish for ever. And in the mean time, 
Psal. 9.18.  even in the midst of all our afflictions, are we comforted in the Lord, for whose sake we endure them: & great benefit do we further reap by them, not only for our own good many other ways, but in this in particular, that these our troubles are a special means to keep discover and remove from among us a number of hypocrites, such as this T. White, who (if it were not for our poverty and banishment) would flock faster unto us and lurk longer among us, under a painted colour of holiness, making show as if they would depart from iniquity & call upon the Name of the Lord (and who more than they?) when in deed their hearts be freight full of the leaven of hypocrisy contention maliciousness and all manner of iniquity: which in such case and estate of things doth oftentimes both sooner and more appear, than otherwise it may be ever would.  
The calumniation of condemning all other Churches and men, we have often answered and cleared heretofore, & this also known to himself. Yet thus he writeth, that in this as in the rest of his dealing all might see, how it is himself that runneth into fearful extremities, and reproacheth with a virulent and venomous tongue. For ourselves, besides our reverend estimation of other Churches and good persuasion of other men, so often published to the world, we have also showed it in our walking towards them, and namely in our dealing with the Dutch ●nd French Churches of this city as with true Churches. Which had we not so esteemed of them, we neither could nor would so have done and dealt with them, as we have.  
THe letter he speaketh of, I have still with me. His falsehood and other bad dealing therein, I will here omit, save only about the doctrines by him laid upon us.  
1. The first is that we held it lawful for a man to live with her that is not his wife, rather than to reveal himself. This he saith: but how doth he prove it so to be held by us? If malice had not possessed him, this error had never been imputed to us either as held by the Church or partaken in by the Elders. Sometimes in deed we have had speech among us of the unlawfulness (as we were persuaded) for man and wife to live together after adultery committed; & about the band of wedlock being broken thereby; & whether that in the case of adultery unknown to others, the offenders were to reveal themselves, or not. About which latter points when we showed our judgement & reasons, this Tho. White (who then was present) did much urge, that a man who knew such a crime by himself must reveal it, or else live in sin, & with one that was not his lawful wife. Whereupon some of us reasoned with him about it, holding that a man should not so reveal himself. The end was, that we differed in judgement about these things, & having had speech of them but by occasion, so rested for the present. Will he now therefore make collections and frame positions of his own or others spe●ch●s, and say (as in his letter) that they are false doctrines that lie upon the Church, or (as here in his Libel) that they are blasphemous doctrines of the Church? What good dealing this is, let the Reader judge. And concerning the question aforesaid, whereas some of us were thus minded about it, that a man having committed adultery (which is unknown to others) is not bound by the word of God to reveal himself, but unfeignedly to repent thereof: and that in such case he may notwithstanding lawfully continue with his wife: Although I be not here in particular to handle this point: yet I will now propound these few things to be considered about it. As namely, what Scriptures teach a man so to accuse himself; whether it be not unnatural for a man so to do; whether in Israel the woman spoken of Numb. 5.12.13. were bound to reveal her adultery (being unknown) until or unless her husband were moved with the spirit of jealousy, as the Law there is given? And, whether ●●w ●en should of themselves reveal such their case to the Magistrates, who have power to put them to death for it? By what Law of God they are bound thereunto? And whether else they cannot have true rpentance but deny the prophecy of Christ & err fundamentally, as here he would persuade?  
2. The second is, That there are qualities in God not essential, & that love in God is not of his being, but that the self same love that is in God, that is also in us. Himself knoweth and hath been here convinced of the notable falsehood hereof, yet shameth not thus to publish it against us. And that now the Reader may know how the matter arose, I will briefly show it. We have in our Church 
* Besides the Ministry of the word.  the use of the exercise of Prophecy spoken of in 1 Cor. 14. chap. Rom. 12.6. 1 Thes. 5.20. In which, some of the brethren such as for gifts are best able (though not in office of Ministry) deliver from some portion of Scripture, doctrine, exhortation, comfort; sometimes two at a time, sometimes more: Then also if there be occasion, upon the Scripture treated of, are questions propounded and answers made accordingly: And the whole action moderated by some of the officers and Overseers of the Church. In this exercise, the first Epistle of john being treated of, upon these words, He that loveth not, knoweth not God: for God is love: the point aforesaid was by way of question spoken of. And about it there was reasoning by two or three of the brethren & this White himself, with objections and answers diversely. Whereupon this Doeg, by some of those brother's reasoning & the 
* Since altered, as himself knoweth.  opinion of one of them about this matter, took the occasion thus to reproach us: which first he did more privately, and now hath done it publicly to the world. Wherein his evil dealing is the more notorious, because himself being then present, knoweth how both at the same time 
b And this also with consent of the Church then signified.  the moderation thereof by one of the Elders was according to t●e truth, disproving the error aforesaid which he would impute unto us; and afterward (he carrying himself very ill about it & other things) that the matter was again heard & examined in the public congregation, where to his face he was convinced to be a false accuser therein. Besides he knoweth the Confession of our faith long since published, which alone doth so fully clear us in it, as very shame of men, if no fear of God, might have restrained his lying lips, and kept him from blaspheming us with so black a mouth.  
3. A third thing there was, ●nd that objected by him publicly in the Church, and noted also in his letter, as a false doctrine lying upon the Church: Namely, that when a matter is in the third place to be brought to the Church by the rule of Christ, Mat. 18.15.16.17. our order being that the elders first have knowledge thereof given them by the parties themselves, then that the case being such as is to come to the Church, it be publicly propounded and handled by them, as in respect of their office appertaineth unto them, being the governors and overseers of the Church: This he blamed then as an error & false doctrine, contrary to Christ's rule, Mat. 18. But here now he concealeth it. And good cause why. For when he was called upon for his proof hereof in the public Congregation where he had made the accusation: he was glad to answer, that he was not provided: And this also after a week's respite to consider of it. Whereupon he was rebuked as hasty to accuse and slow to prove, whereas wisdom would have taught him, first to have been provided of proof before he had set himself to accuse as he did. But if now he think it to be no error in us, and therefore speaks not of it, he might even by this have learned to set a watch before his mouth, at least not to have barked rgainst us in so vile a manner as he hath done. Or if he still think that we err therein, contrary to Christ's rule, Mat. 18. (as he objected heretofore) why hath he not here noted it down with the other aforesaid? Is it because that ordinance of Christ overthroweth the Prelacy and government of the Church of England (whither he is now revolted) it being such as they neither do neither can in their constitution observe that rule at all? But how then can he approve them for a true Church in such estate, and how will he answer the reason alleged by us against them 
c Answ. to Mr A. H. pag. 62.  heretofore in this respect? which is this,  
Every true visible Church of Christ hath Christ's power spoken of Mat. 18▪ 17.18. to cast out ●●●unate sinners from among them:  
But the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England have not the power of Christ there spoken of, to cast out obstinate sinners from among them:  
Therefore the Ecclesiastical assemblies of England cannot (in their constitution) be accounted true visible Churches of Christ.  
And hitherto of his false & blasphemous doctrines objected against us in his letter. Which in his Libel he saith I promised to answer & performed it not. Yet in the letter itself he writeth that 
* To I.L. in his own hearing.  I said, I had spoken unto him both privately & publicly, & now would not further have to do with him. And concerning his letter, my answer was to this effect (as I remember) sent him by I.L. one of his own company, besides my speech unto himself: That the contents of his letter were partly private, partly public: that for the private, I required proof; and for the public, I would not deal privaely. Wishing also the said I.L. to deal with him for some reports (ascribed to him in the letter) concerning me which he denied, and to end it between themselves who were of one company together: And as I should hear thereof, so I should consider what to do for the rest. This let him ask of I.L. his own companion: and let himself now look unto it who it is that falsifieth.  
For not answering his letter by writing, I had good reason: as may appear by that which before is alleged. And Wisdom teacheth, there be persons who are not to be answered according to their foolishness, and times also when to speak and when to be silent: Pro. 26.4. Eccles. 3.7. with 2 King. 18.36. The dumb Ministers spoken of 
d Answ. to Mr H. ja. p. 17 4.  in the place here cited by him, he hath now consorted himself withal, being returned to his old vomit, and become as dumb as any of them for defending the truth against the adversaries thereof: yet opening his mouth above all his fellows in blaspheming the truth and witnesses of it. Wherein the case of the worst dumb dog in England is ten thousand fold better than his: And happy it had been for him, if his tongue had cleaved to the roof of his mouth, and his hand never used pen, more than theirs: whereas now his sin is unspeakably greater & his estate infinitely more miserable. But leaving him to the judgement of God, I will proceed to the other particulars of his book: desiring the Reader, for all his pretence of due proof of his charges, to remember that saying of Solomon, He that is first in his own cause is just: then cometh his neighbour, and maketh inquir● of him. Prov. 18.17.  

Of the first head of Th: White his Treatise.  
THat which followeth in his Treatise, himself reduceth to four heads. In which order I will also handle them. The first is, that he saith we have betrayed our own cause in writing. And to prove it, he allegeth that I err in the description of a true visible Church, and thereby overthrew the main drift of my writings. I answer: 1. His reason follows not. For may not I or any other of us err in some thing▪ & yet our general cause not be betrayed? Again, did not Nathan the Prophet err about the building of the Temple, and Peter the Apostle about the Gentiles calling and communion? Could now an Edomite or Pharisee have justly gathered, that they had therefore betrayed the cause of Israel or of the Christians witnessed by them against the adversaries? To come nearer to our own times, it is well known that Mr. Calvine, Luther, Beza, Fulk, powel, Sutcliff, etc. writing against the Papists Anabaptists and the like, have in sundry things erred, even concerning the very points of the difference between them: Shall we say therefore that they have betrayed the cause handled between them and their adversaries? and overthrown the main drift of their own writings? Not to speak of the Martyrs put to death by the Papists, how both many of them, and in many things, have erred, even concerning the causes controverted in their times. Should we therefore conclude that they betrayed their own cause? Or that they did not witness the truth notwithstanding faithfully even unto death?  
2. Our cause touching the Church of England, is, that the estate thereof is such in their Prelacy, Priesthood, worship, confusion, etc. as it is not lawful by the word of God for any to join or continue with them in such estate: And moreover, that it is the duty of all Christians, to receive and keep the faith and ordinances of Christ, wherein the Primitive Churches were planted by the Apostles. To discuss and make these things more plain, I reduced our whole cause to seven questions, and so propounded them: viz,  
1. Whether the Lord jesus Christ have by his last testament given unto and set in his Church sufficient ordinary Offices, with their Callings, Works, & Maintenance, for the administration of his holy things, and for the sufficient ordinary instruction, guidance, and service of his Church to the end of the world, or no?  
2. Whether the Offices of Pastors, Teachers, Elders,, Deacons, and Helpers, be those Offices appointed by Christ in his Testament, as aforesaid. Or whether the present ecclesiastical Offices of Archbishops, Lordbishops, Suffragans, Deans, Prebendaries, Canons, Petticanons, Priests, Deacons, Archdeacon's, Doctors of divinity, Bachelors of divinity, Chaplains or housepriests, Commissaries, officials, Proctors, Apparitors, Parsons, Vicars, Curates, Vagrant or Mercenary preachers, Churchwardens, Sidemen, Clerks, Sextins, and the rest now had in the Cathedral and Parishional assemblies, be those Offices appointed by Christ in his Testament as is aforesaid, or no?  
3. Whether the Calling and entrance into these Ecclesiastical offices aforesaid, their Administration, and Maintenance now had and retained in England, be the manner of calling administration & maintenance which Christ hath appointed for the offices of his Church above named, or no?  
4. Whether every true visible Church of Christ be not a company of people called and separated out from the world & the false worship and ways thereof by the word of God, & joined together in fellowship of the Gospel, by voluntary profession of the faith and obedience of Christ? And whether the Ecclesiastical Assemblies of the Land be such, or no?  
5 Whether the Sacraments (being seals of righteousness which is by faith) may be administered to any other but to the faithful and their seed, or in any other ministry & manner then is appointed by jesus Christ the Apostle and high Priest of our profession? And whether they be not otherwise administered in the Cathedral & parishional Assemblies of England at this day?  
6. Whether the Book of Common prayer with the Feasts, Fasts, Holy days, stinted prayers, and liturgy prescribed therein, and used in these Assemblies, be the true worship of God commanded in his word, or the devise and invention of man, for God's worship and service.  
7. Whether all people and Churches (without exception) be not bound in Religion, only to receive & submit unto that Ministry, worship, and order, which Christ as Lord and King hath given and appointed to his Church? Or whether any may receive or join unto another devised by man, for the service of God? And consequently, whether they which join to the present ecclesiastical Ministry, worship, and order of the Cathedral and parishional Assemblies, can be assured by the word of God that they join to the former ordained by Christ, and not to the latter devised by man, even the man of sin, for the worship and service of God?  
Now reducing our cause to these heads, if it were so that I erred in one of them, is therefore our cause betrayed? Or should my particular error, be imputed to the whole Church, or reputed the betraying of our general cause? Is there not difference to be put between erring through ignorance (if this were an error) and betraying with knowledge? Or if this manner of reasoning which he useth might be admitted, who can deny but the Protestants of England, and of all sorts, have an hundred and an hundred times betrayed their own cause, and overthrown the very drift of their own writings? And if they think it not of weight against them for their multitude of known errors, with what face can it be urged against us for one supposed error?  
3. For the description itself which was given of a visible Church, I still hold it to be good. It was thus, A true visible Church of Christ is a company of faithful people, by the word of God called out from the world and the false ways thereof, gathered together in fellowship of the Gospel, by a voluntary profession of the faith and obedience of Christ. This is the description: which he would prove to be false, partly by gathering my meaning thereof in other places of that & other books, partly and particularly by my judgement concerning the Israelites in Egypt, spoken of in the Ans. to M● ja. pag. 47. Where before I answer him, let me advertise the Reader that if there be any weight in this exception, it was found out, not by Th. White (as by his book might be supposed) but by some of the Ministers in Wiltshire, specially by one Mr Io. je. and other his fellows there, who have bestowed much labour in reading our writings, whether for love to the truth, or that they might find somewhat thereby the more to cavil against it, let their walking and dealing show. Whose disciple now this White is become, having heretofore stood as opposite against them, as white is to black. Now therefore to answer them all under one, I will write somewhat touching this matter: referring the further handling of it (if there be need) till some other adversaries, with whom we ha●● to deal concerning it and the other heads of our cause, give further occasion.  
Two things (as I said) about this description are specially noted and urged: the first about the meaning; the other about my writing of the Israelites in Egypt. For the first, the meaning is plain by the words themselves, and by the drift of that and all other of our boo●s, as may appear not only by the places here cited by him, but by many other compared together, and particularly by an express declaration annexed unto it in our Apology against the Oxf: Doct. pag. 36.44.45. Yet now again to explain and prove the truth of that description, I will here treat a little more thereof.  
To esteem and describe aright a true visible Church, we must look especially to two things, 1. the calling of Christ; 2. the covenant and communion of the Church: To Christ his calling, like as the Apostles every where describe the Churches according to it: As namely, the Churches of Ephesus, Corinth, Rome etc. For which see these Scriptures, Rom. 1.5.6.7. 1 Cor. 1.2.9.24. Gal. 1.6. & 5.8.13. Ephe. 1.1. with 4.1.4. Col. 3.15. 1 Thes. 2.12. & 5.24. 2 Thes. 1.11. & 2.14. Heb. 3.1. 1 Pet. 1.15. & 2.9.21. 2 Pet. 1.1.3. Jude, ver. 1. Now it cannot be denied but Christ's calling of his Churches & people, is unto the whole faith of the Gospel & willing obedience thereof, & from all evil & iniquity that is any way repugnant thereunto, & therefore from the false worship & ways of the world whatsoever they be or wheresoever. And hereupon did the Apostles reprove the Churches still when they fell into any sin either against the first or second Table, as not walking worthy the holy calling whereunto they were called in Christ; and required of them also obedience to all the commandments & ordinances of Christ from time to tyme. Therefore should White and his teachers have better observed that clause of the description aforesaid, by the word of God called out etc. So might they have perceived (if they had love to the truth) both that the description is good; and that the abberrations of true Church's are so far from proving it any way false, as they do in deed approve the truth of it: in as much as the very being of a Church by the calling of Christ requireth of them to walk otherwise.  
Another thing that we are to look unto, yet also depending upon the former, is the Church's covenant and communion. This covenant is to be considered, as made by them unto the Lord, and one with another, to walk together in the truth of the Gospel, in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord: And therefore to forsake and avoid whatsoever is there against. As may appear by these Scriptures, Exod. 19.3— 8. 2 King. 23.2.3. Esa. 2.2.3. & 14.1. and 44.5. jer. 50.4.5. Act. 2.41.42.47. and 11.21.24. Rom. 12.5. 2 Cor. 9.13. Ephes. 4.4.5.6. Phil. 1.1.5. Therefore also, the description aforesaid is good. And so might the adversaries have perceived, if they had well observed that other clause therein, of being gathered and joined together in fellowship of the Gospel etc.  
And what else is it that giveth the being to a true visible Church, but the calling of Christ, & the Church's covenant according thereunto? Whereupon in a true Church may and aught these things following alway to be observed:  
1. That it hath Christ alone for the Mediator, that is, for the Prophet, Priest, and King thereof.  
2. That it is to be accounted the spouse and body of Christ, the household city and kingdom of God, the ground and pillar o truth, a Church of Saints, etc.  
3. That the promises and pledges of God's covenant presence & blessing do appertain unto them in that estate.  
4. That it appertaineth to Christ, to remove his Candlestick & take away his kingdom from a Church when and as he pleaseth.  
5. That every true visible Church hath authority and power from Christ to receive in members willingly professing the same faith with them, & to cast out obstinate offenders from among them.  
6. That the want or transgression of Christ's ordinances doth not simply or presently disannul them from being a true Church. For example, When a people are so called and covenanted as aforesaid, though yet they have none in office among them (either Pastors, Teachers, Elders etc.) they are notwithstanding a true visible Church. And by their calling and covenant they have power in Christ, as he giveth them fit men and means, to choose and enjoy these, as any other of his ordinances. Likewise also, when any of the Church yea or the whole do transgress, either in some thing which yet they have not seen, or whereinto now they are fallen, they are notwithstanding a true visible Church. And by their calling and covenant they have power in Christ to redress them. Which when upon knowledge they shall refuse, and ●o continue, then are they to be esteemed according as their case shall require.  
So then, to judge rightly of a true Church, we must look (as the Apostles did) at their calling and communion in the Gospel. Which being observed, it willbe easy to put difference between the errors, and the constitution of true Churches: as Christ and his Apostles did, in the Churches of Asia, Achaia, Galatia, etc. to reprove them for the one, and yet to approve them as true Churches for the other. And this also until Christ himself remove his candlestick and take away his kingdom from among them: which is to be left unto him, to do when & as it pleaseth him.  
And this also might serve for answer to the exception drawn from my writing, concerning the Israelites in Egypt: who sinned with Idols, and yet were God's people. But it being so urged by diverse as it is, I will note a few things more concerning it in particular. The objection is made thus, If they committed Idolatry with the Idols of Egypt, how were they then a company of faithful people separated from all false ways? I answer, By the Lords former calling of them to the obedience of himself, who was by covenant the Lord their God, and they his people. Gen. 12. & 17. & 46. with Exod. 2.23.24.25. & 3.7 8.15.16. Numb. 20.16. Deut. 26.7. Which also is laid as the ground of the admonition, for calling of them from that Idolatry spoken of, Ezech. 20.7. And may not a people so separated as aforesaid, fall into this sin of Idolatry, aswell as into other sins? See the case of Israel afterward again, Exod. 32. Where Moses in his prayer to God, calleth Israel the Lord's people, even then when they had committed such Idolatry, as the Lord would presently have consumed them for it. Exod. 32.1.10.11. And of Israel again, see what is recorded, judg. 2. etc. And likewise of the Church of Rome, which at first was a true Church separated from all false ways, yet fell into this sin, and continueth therein. Rom. 1.6.7.8. & 16.19. with Rev. ●. & 13. and 14. & 17. chap.  
But this was the general estate of the Israelites at that tyme. What then? So may it fall out with a true Church: as now hath been showed: and so we are taught, Lev. 4.13.14. Yet here also might be demanded, whether he mean it to be so general, as including all of Israel therein, specially considering what is written of some in those times, Ex. 1. & 2. & 6. 20-27. Numb. 1. with Heb. 11.23. etc. And, whether this Idolatry were public, or private, like as that spoken of, Ezech. 8, 12. Zeph. 1.1.4.5.  
But howsoever, their sin was also of obstinacy: for they were admonished from the Lord, & yet they rebelled against him, as the Scripture showeth, Ezech. 20.7.8. And even the same Scripture showeth also, that for this cause they deserved themselves & God thought to have powered out his indignation upon them: but stayed it, in respect of his own Name (which is called upon*hiss Churches & people), & not because of their estate, as now it was, Ezec. 20.7.8.9. And how doth this then overthrow, & not rather confirm, the description aforesaid? Or must we not alway desribe & esteem a Church by the condition thereof according to the revealed word of God: & yet leave unto the Lord to esteem & deal therewith notwithstanding as in any respect seemeth good unto himself? Or when God saith, he is the Lord their God, and calleth them his son and first borne, whom he might in respect of their own estate cast of, can we not so esteem of them, but we must thereupon conclude, that in the description of a true visible Church, Idolatry and all false ways are not to be excluded? or (to speak of the questions controverted at this day) that Rome, in all her Idolatries, is notwithstanding still to be reputed the spouse of Christ, and not to be rejected as an harlot? and so likewise all the Churches that be her daughters in that estate? Again, what if it were (as 
* Tremell. and jun. on Exod. 2.23  some think) that Israel first rebelling, and so provoking God to wrath, as is aforesaid, did afterward through the affliction which by Pharaoh was increased upon them, turn into their own heart, and cry unto the Lord God of their fathers (as we read, Exod. 2. and 3. Numb. 20.16. Deut. 26.7.)? should we not then put difference between obstinacy still persisted in, & that which is afterward repent of & amended? Not to speak of the Israelites estate in Egypt, how in their kindred and families the Church consisted and was governed, and how then they had not the word written; neither of their estate afterward in the wilderness, how God did never so punish them for any of their transgressions (though of the same nature) before his Law given unto them, as he did after: as may be observed in the history: So teaching all ages succeeding, to take special heed to his written word, & according to it to esteem & walk in all things.  
Wherefore to end this point, thus I think, that for Israel & all other people and Churches, we are bound always so to esteem and walk, as by the word of God we have direction and warrant from him, and neither to judge nor, walk otherwise: And as Christ giveth to all true Churches their being, so to leave unto him to take it away when and as he pleaseth. And for this case of Israel in particular, let me further ask, whether such of the Israelites as should now have left that Idolatry spoken of, ought not also to have left communion therein with the rest so transgressing: and yet to have left them to the Lord to esteem and deal with them as in any respect should seem good unto himself?  
For that which he objecteth next out of the Preface to the last answ. to Mr ja. sect. 6. it is concerning Churches wilfully persisting in error and disobedience of the truth and voice of Christ; and showed by the example of the Churches of the jews 〈…〉 ●●●son objected about them by D.B. For which I refer the Reader to that Preface & section, together with that which is said in the answer to the 4. section of the same Preface: and more particularly, to that which I have written about this point in the book itself, pag. 161.195.196. & in the answer to Mr A.H. pag. 61.62. Where the Reader shall find what I have written, and what my judgement is, concerning this matter: namely, that all good and lawful means being first used towards true Churches fallen into sin, if they amend not▪ but wilfully persist therein the Lord hath threatened to remove the candlestick out of his place, and to take his kingdom from among the: requiring also of such as are willing to obey the truth & voice of Christ, now to save themselves from such a froward generation, & to walk in obedience of his faith & commandments. Rev. 2.5. Mat. 21.42.43. Esa. 8.12— 16. Act. 2.40.41.42. & 13.46.51. & 18.5.6. & 19.8.9. And according to this would I be understood, wheresoever I speak concerning this argument.  
For the jews in Egypt rebelling after admonition, besides the difference to be put between obstinacy persisted in, and that which is repent of (which is thought to have been their estate) I have here before showed how we are to discern, between their estate in respect of their own desert, and the Lords mercy unto them for his Name● sake notwithstanding. Which diversity of respect being now revealed unto us in the word of God concerning them, we are therein to rest, and so to speak and esteem of their estate as the Scriptures teach us. Ezech. 20.7.8.9. with Exod. 4.22. and 3.10.18. & 8, 22. and 12. chap and 15.16. Hos. 11.1.  
For the jews in Christ's time and after his death, what I think and my reasons thereof, the Reader may find also in the Treatise aforesaid: both in the Preface, sect. 4. & 5. and in the book itself, pag. 161.195. For that he objecteth here, about their estate after admonition, two things are to be observed: the one concerning that people; the other concerning their admonition. For the first, touching the people, God had chosen that nation out of all the nations of the earth to be his; he had done great & wondrous things for them; he had given them his word and statutes; he had promised that of them and to them he would send the Messiah; him they expected; for refusal of him they were to be cut of, and the Gentiles to be graffed in▪ many were the cities and Synagogues of them; to to jerusalem the males came but thrice a year, etc. And for the second, touching admonition, God would have them fully taught admonished and convinced that the Messiah was now come, & that jesus was he: therefore was john Baptist appointed to show him unto them, and to baptize in his name; therefore did Christ send his disciples into their cities to preach & testify it unto them▪ therefore also did Christ himself every where among them teach & confirm it by his doctrine and miracles: and being the true Passeover shadowed out by all their types, was put to death at their feast of Passeover, & rose again the third day acco●●ing ●o the scriptures; to accomplish the promises made unto the Fathers, and to leave ●he jews without all colour o● 〈…〉 ●●lief and obstinacy they should be cut off. These things and the like noted of them in the Scripture, are to be observed of us, that we may aright esteem of their estate, and of the Lords account of them and dealing with them. Yea the Scriptures here cited by himself show this very thing, how the Lord did not at first cut of that people, but after he had used sundry means unto them, and that also many times. Luk. 7.30.31, etc. Mat. 23.37.38. And the same is plainly declared, Mar. 21.33— 43. and throughout the history of the Evangelists and Acts of the Apostles.  
Besides for admonition also observe, how God requireth that a particular man for a private ●●nne be admonished in the 〈◊〉 second and third place, before he be cast out, Mat. 18.15.16.17. And in rejecting an heretic, that it be done after the first and second admonition, Tit. 3.10. Also in the Lord his own dealing with the particular Churches of the Gentiles, that he gave them space to repent, after the admonitions given unto them, before he would remove the candlestick out of his place, Rev. 2.4.5.16.21. & 3.3.16.18.20.22. And what then should let, that we should not likewise obeserve Gods dealing with the jews at that time, and accordingly esteem of their estate? Concerning whom, note also, when now they had despised all the former means and crucified jesus, than the Apostles testifying unto them that he was the Christ, did first at jerusalem & after wheresoever they came and found the disobedient, teach all to separate and save themselves from such a froward generation. Act. 2.14— 40. & 13.14— 51. & 18.5.6. & 19.8.9. & 28.25.26.27.  
Thus have I touching this point showed my mind: wherein if I err, let it be showed by the word of God. And though in some things I differ in judgement from Mr H Barrow (that faithful Martyr of Christ) yet doth it not prejudice the truth testified by both of us, against the Antichristian estate of the Church of England. This themselves may observe in thei● own writers against the Papists: in whom it were endless to recount the differences found among them, & frivolous to pretend thereby approbation of the Romish Church in their estate. We all here know but in part: 
1 Cor. 1●.  and who is he that erreth in nothing? If then in this I were mistaken, have I therefore betrayed our cause, or overthrown the main drift of my writings? Nay if this be all the error in my writings that with all his searching he can find, I shall rather think our cause to be so approved and my drift attained therein, for the truth of Christ against the present estate of their Church, as they are not able either to defend themselves or convince us by the word of God, and therefore now set themselves to search snatch and cavil at something for objection against us. Which also if they find, and it be graunte● them, albeit our defence therein were the weaker, yet were their cause therefore never a whit the better.  
To conclude this point, besides personal abuse of diverse (of which 〈…〉 where he hath it again) he objecteth against me, that I condemn the Dutch and French Churches, for despising our admonition etc. But in what writing of ●●nne hath he found this, or in what words have I spoken it to any, or in what dealing towards them have I showed it? Where is the due proof of his charges, which ere while he told us of? How reverendly we think of these Churches, we have often showed and published heretofore; which I need not here repeat. And what dealing hath passed between us and the Elders of the Dutch and French Churches of this City, I shall have occasion hereafter to show more particularly: To which place I 〈◊〉 it▪ Now only let the Reader here consider how truly and fitly his shutting up of this point may be applied to himself: who heretofore hath held and witnessed the same testimony with us against the Church of England, and corruptions of these Churches here: but now wavereth or rather in deed is revolted in both, as the world seeth, and his walking showeth: He that wavereth in his own testimony, ●ow shall his witness ●e received? But thus is that verified in him which the wise man speaketh, 
Pro. 12.13.  The ●vill man is snared by the wickedness of his own lips.   

Of the second head of Th● White his Treatise.  
HItherto of the first ●ead of his 〈…〉, ●hat he saith we cut of from being true Curches in our account, all the Churches of Christ that ever have been since the Apostles days, or now are, y●● and ourselves also, His proof of all this, he would fetch, partly from the description aforesaid, partly from a 〈◊〉 Treatise entitled, A true description out of the word of God, of the visible Church. His instances are three, 1. of the churches that have been since the Apostles days; 2. of the Churches that now are; 3. & of ourselves. Touching which (omitting that I have answered before to his former exception, which may here again be remembered, though I repeat it not) let the Reader now first observe and mark it well, how he saith, the Churches that have been since the Apostles days, and not, the Churches that were in their days. Beli●● 〈…〉 that th● 〈…〉 said cutteth not them of: And if not them, than not any other at all. For that which made them to be true visible Churches, doth and must make all other so to be, to the end of the world, namely, the calling of Christ and their mutual covenant and communion in his Gospel: as we have showed before out of the Scriptures. Whereupon I reason thus:  
If the description aforesaid cut not of the Primitive Churches planted by the Apostles, from being true visible Churches of Christ; then doth it not cut of any other which since that time have been, are, or shallbe to the end of the world:  
But the former is true: Therefore the latter.  
The Proposition is undeniable, from the Scriptures and demonstration aforesaid. It is one and the same thing that giveth being to all true visible Churches of Chr●●t. That which gave being to the Churches of jerusalem, Antioch, Rome etc. gave also being to the Churches of Galatia, Corinth, Ephesus, etc. notwithstanding the corruptions they fell into. And that which then gave being to them, giveth being to all that have been since, or ever shallbe. The Church is the body of Christ, and every one members for their part; He is th● 〈◊〉 ●f the body, & from him doth all the life & power thereof proceed: He is not divided.  
The Assumption is as certa●ne, 〈◊〉 will appear●, in that the Primitive Churches planted by the Apostles, were companies of faithful people, by the word of God called out and separated from the world and the false ways thereof, gathered and joined together in fellowship of the Gospel, by a voluntary profession of the faith and obedience of Christ. This is proved by the Acts of the Apostles and their Epistles throughout. And if this man, or his Masters of whom he learned to object against this description, do deny it (as by their exceptions & reasons is implied) may not we justly return unto them, that which unjustly they would impute unto us, and say, Are not they then the blasphemers of the Christians and their Churches? Or is not this to rob Christ of his honour? Or may not that saying be verified of themselves, He that despiseth his neighbour is a fool. Pro. 11.12.  
But let us come to his proof concerning the Churches spoken of by himself. Thus he concludeth it:  
If no Church that hath been since the Apostles days or now is that we read of▪ be separate from all false ways in their account▪ then by this description and in tho● 〈…〉 Church's: But the former is true: Therefore the latter.  
Answ. The whole syllogism faileth, as he hath propounded it. In the Proposition or first 〈…〉 tha● which in the description is particularly specified and needful alway to be observed (namely, to be companies by the word of God called out from the world and false ways thereof, gathered and joined together in fellowship of the Gospel etc. Wherefore his Proposition is not so undeniable as h● suppos●th from tha● description. And when these particulars which now he hath omitted be 〈…〉 to be implied, yet then also by further following of ●he Assumption may there be occasion to observe more concerning it. And for the Assuption itself or second part of the Reason, it must needs fail in like manner, because of that omitted in the Proposition aforesaid. His reason therefore (if he would have reasoned sound and to the purpose) should have been framed thus:  
If no Church that hath been since the Apostles days or now is that we read of, be in their account, by the word of God called out and separated from the world and the false ways thereof, gathered and joined together in fellowship of the Gospel, by voluntary profession of the faith and obedience of Christ, then by his description and in their account must they be no true Churches: But the former is true: Therefore the latter.  
Answ. 1. The very propounding of the Reason thus, showeth the weakness of it. 2. And what if we would not be drawn to speak of the Churches since, but only of them that were in the Apostles days: keeping only to the word of God and that which is recorded therein? If they cannot by it or the example of those Churches disprove our testimony, what would it help them or hurt us, if we answered them no further? 3. Yet to answer this Reason notwithstanding, and to omit the Proposition, as is aforesaid: I require proof of the Assumption, because all that he hath brought for confirmation of it, doth not yet prove it: as will appear by discussing his allegations, concerning the Churches he speaketh of, 1. that were then; 2. that now are; 3. and ourselves.  
For the first, viz, the Churches heretofore since the Apostles days, all that he saith is that we account the very saying of the Lords Prayer as a prayer to be a false way, which was used from the Apostles age etc.  
Ans. 1. Is this all he can allege against us concerning those Churches & times? Others 〈…〉 would persuade they have it by 〈◊〉 also of those w●ite●s, that Archbishops, Primates, Metropolitans, Archdeacon's, stinted forms of prayer, the use of the sign of the cross, and a number of such like things have been from the Apostles age. Should we therefore believe them herein? And how cometh it that this Antiquary hath never a word of all these for those times? Is it that he thinketh we hold them not now for false ways of governing the Church and worshipping the Lord? Or is it not in deed because the Hypocrite would not yet be seen to speak for these, and would notwithstanding so dissemble the matter, as yet may please all sorts that are against us?  
2. To speak of that he allegeth, admitting all he saith here to be true, yet is not the Assumption thereby proved. For in all true Churches, the calling of Christ and the Church's covenant to obey the Gospel binds them from all error and false ways: notwithstanding that both the members and the whole body be subject to fall into them from time to time, while we live here on earth. If then this saying of the Lords prayer as a prayer be a false way of worshipping God, it was excluded by their calling and fellowship in the Gospel: howsoever they fell into the use of it. If it be not a false way, than were it but our error so to think, which we were also to corrrect, & the description notwithstanding still should stand good. Now what our judgement is concerning the right use of that form of prayer, together with our reasons out of the Scripture thereabout, we have often showed and published heretofore, in diverse treatises, which till they be answered and refuted, I shall not need here to repeat them, or to insist any further upon that matter. Only thus much now, If the using of the Lords prayer as a prayer, be a part of the worship of God appointed by Christ, then did the Apostles in the planting of the Primitive Churches teach them so to use it: For they were enjoined by Christ to teach whatsoever he commanded them, and so they did: Mat. 28.20. with Act. 2.42. and 4.24— 31. and 20.27. 1 Cor. 11.23. But that they taught to use it thus, none can show either in their Acts, or in their Epistles. And Tertullian saith, (if they regard his testimony) 
* Lib. de Monogam.  Scriptura negat quod non notat: The Scripture denieth that which it noteth not. This man therefore and such as do so hold, that the Lords prayer is to be used as a prayer, are bound to show by the Scriptures that the Apostles did teach the first Churches thus to use it: unless they would (with the Papists) argue the Scripture of imperfection, or the Apostles of unfaithfulness.  
3. The distinction of faulty and false is here also to be observed. True Churches may be faulty in sundry things (as those of Asia, Corinth etc. and yet not straightway therefore be false Churches. True Prophets may be faulty in diverse things (as jeremiah, jonah, etc.) and yet they be no false Prophets. True worshippers of God may be faulty in their worship many ways (as may be seen in Corinth, Colosse, etc.) and yet not therefore be false worshippers. By which examples also may appear, both what difference is between false and faulty, and how needful it is always in these cases to be duly regarded.  
4. His proof, that the Lords prayer was used as a Prayer from the Apostles age, is out of Tertullian whose words be these: 
Tertul. lib. de Orat.  Quoniam Dominus prospector humanarum necessitatum seorsum post traditam orandi disciplinam, Petite inquit & accipietis, & sunt quae petantur pro circumstantia cuiusque, praemissa legitima & ordinaria oratione quasi fundamento, accidentium ius est desideriorum, ius est superstruendi extriusecus petitiones: Cum memoria tamen praeceptorum, ne quantum a praeceptis, tantum ab auribus Dei longè simus. Because the Lord that seeth man's necessities did apart after the doctrine of prayer delivered say, Ask & ye shall receive, and there be things to be asked according to the circumstance of every one, the lawful and ordinary prayer being premised as a foundation, we may for the desires that fall out, we may from without it build thereupon our petitions, yet with remembrance of the things commanded, lest we be as far from the ears of the Lord as from his commandments. touching this testimony (if it were a thing to be stood upon in this case) many things might be excepted. 1. Tertullian lived about 200 years after the Apostles days. 2. Many things were held lawful & ordinarily used in his time, which were not at all in the Apostles days: As, prayer with cloaks put off, and hands washed; signing with the cross, and anointing with oil after Baptism; Godfathers and Godmothers; mixing of water with wine in the Lord's supper; oblations for the dead; Lenten fast; holy water etc. 3. He also followed & was infected with diverse errors, which 〈…〉 judgement, even in his own time reproved and rejected: As, the jewish error of the Chiliastes, that the godly shall have a pleasant life on earth, a thousand years before the end of the world: Also, that the Angels fell for lust of women; That Noah, Abraham, and others of those times were righteous by the righteousness of the Law of nature: Whither also may be referred his errors about free-will, Satisfaction for sins, superstitious Fasts & heresies of Montanus, etc. Not to speak how from his exposition of the Lords Prayer (even in this book here alleged) the Papists would gather proof for their heresy of Transubstantiation, and the Lutherans of Consubstantiation. Again, he disallowed sundry things, which were approved them by others according to the truth: As, the Baptism of children, second marriages; fleeing in time of persecution etc. 4. But if they think there be such weight in Tertullians' testimony, why do they then at their preaching use the Lords prayer after their own prayers, when as Tertullian saith it was first premised as a foundation whereupon petitions from out of it might be built? Which (admitting the use of it, yet) showeth a quite different using of it then, from that which now is had. And let it here be noted by the way, that Tertullian doth often in that book call it a form & doctrine of prayer, and showeth that Christ hath not tied us to the use of those words, but thereon to build our petitions as upon a foundation, according to the need & occasion of every one, following his precepts. Why also do they not hear●en to Tertullian, when in the same book he saith, 
* Tertull. Lib. de orat.  Such things are justly to be charged with vanity, as are done without authority of any precept either of the Lord or of the Apostles: And when other where he saith 
a Lib. de prescript. adversus haeret.  The Apostles did faithfully deliver to the nations the discipline they received of Christ: And, 
b Lib. de virgin. veland.  that no continuance of times, or supportation of persons can prejudice the truth? If they will believe Tertullian, their book of common prayer, their Prelacy, Priesthood, cross, surplice, and the like retained among them, may justly be charged with vanity, as being never appointed by the Lord or his Apostles. Neither can all their gloss persuade that ever they came from Christ, seeing the Apostles did not deliver them to the nations, as appeareth by their writings. Nor is it material, whatsoever continuance of times they pretend, or supportation of persons they may have. None can prejudice the truth, as Tertullian saith. And for the point in hand except they can show that the Apostles did teach to use the Lords prayer as a prayer, it is neither the continuance of times, nor the supportation of any persons, be they Old writers or Churches, that can be admitted for a sufficient warrant, even by Tertullians' own testimony.  
For the Churches that now are, we also refer it to our dealing with them. In our writings we have often signified our esteeming of them for true Churches: and in our walking towards them we have always showed it. And this more particularly, as we have had more special occasion, in our dealing with the Dutch & French Churches of this City. When some of their members have left them, because of their corruptions, and come to join themselves unto us, we have required such first to deal with them, as with true Churches alway should be done, namely, to advertise the Elders first, and then the whole body of the Church whereof they were (if they might be suffered) of the corruptions, for which they thought to leave them. Which we require not of such as come unto us from any false Church. Also, when some of our Church have gone unto them, and declined from the truth which they professed with us, unto their corruptions, we have had dealing thereabout with the Elders both of the Dutch and French Churches of this town, that were by the rest of their Elderships deputed thereunto, before we would proceed with the parties for this their revolt and transgression. And when the Dutch Church here received such to be members of them, as our Church excommunicated for their sins, we also admonished their Elders hereof, desiring that by themselves or by us knowledge of these things might be given to the whole body of their Church. Which course of dealing we use not with any false Church or the Ministers thereof. But to insert here in particular the dealing that hath passed between us & them of this town, 
Confess. with Mr jun. letters pag. 54.  would be to long: & their corruptions whereabout we have dealt with them, are already published. By which and this that hath here been said, let the Reader judge, whether we have not cause to put difference between them & the other Churches of these countries not so dealt withal.  
For not hearing of them in other of their Congregations in these countries, this I answer: That seeing by the mercy of God we have seen and forsaken the corruptions yet remaining in the public ministration and condition of these Churches (if they be all like to them of this city) we therefore cannot partake with them in such case, without declining and apostasy from the truth which we have ourselves already received and professed. This also I speak of the members of our Church so walking and witnessing as is aforesaid, and not of the members of their own Churches, whose duty I think it is, before they may leave them for their corruptions, first to signify them unto them, and by all good means to seek the redress thereof among them, as being members of the same body with them. Which I take also to be the duty of all such, as have knowledge of their corruptions, and being not of them, yet would communicate with them in their public administration. And this for true Churches. But as for any false, these are not the duties or rules prescribed for them, but other of a far differing nature, namely, when once we see their abominations, to separate from them without delay, and to witness against them even unto death. The further declaration whereof with confirmation from the Scriptures, the Reader may have in diverse of our Treatises already published about our cause. As in the Refut of Mr. Giff. In the Answ. to Mr. A.H. pag. 61. etc.  
But he provoketh me yet further, and saith, If he can, let him name any one Church on the face of the earth now, that holdeth not false ways, yea even in their constitution in their account. Although I might answer as before, that the calling of Christ and the Church's covenant to walk in the faith of his Gospel excludeth all false ways in all true Churches (whether as yet seen or unseen) and therefore in the Reformed Churches so acknowledged by us: yet because he presseth me so earnestly to name but any one Church, on the face of the earth, I will give the instance, of that Church in the west parts of England whereof himself was a joined member, when he separated from the Church of England, and held the same faith with them and us, from which he is now apostate. And let him now name any false way holden by them in their constitution in our account.  
Of the distinction to be observed between faulty & false worship, I have spoken 
* pag 23.  here before. As also, of his blaspheming the Christians and their Churches, despising neighbours, and robbing Christ himself of his honour. And now by that which hath been said, let the Reader observe how true it is in himself, that after all his earnest endeavour not alone to wound but even to kill others (if he could) he hath turned the point of his weapon into his own bowels. Which will also yet further appear in that which followeth, in his particular objection against the Church whereof we are ourselves, which he saith is not agreeable to our description aforesaid.  
Against ourselves, the proof he bringeth is this that he saith, we are not separate from all open offenders, and all false ways: and to show this, he produceth many particular persons and matters. I answer: admitting all he saith against us both the general and particulars were true, yet notwithstanding the description aforesaid should stand good, and our Church also agreeable thereunto. For this yet should be the error of our practice, not of our covenant or calling in Christ: According to which we are alway to esteem or Churches, as we have ●hewed before. Otherwise to reason as this man doth against us, were to condemn those Churches of Asia, Galatia, Corinth, and all that ever have been from the beginning to this day.  
But to come to the particulars, his first allegation is, that he saith we retain among us open offenders: and for instance the first he nameth is one Cast. noted publicly in our meeting for cozenage etc. A man that is of the Church of England, and so was a good while before this book of Whites was published. Sometime in deed he lived among us here, but after a while began to be so noted and dealt with, as finding the Church to be no harbour for him (but that he must walk better, or be cast out from among us) he returned to England, where he knew he might be retained in that Church, and where Th. White his fellow will (no doubt) brook him well enough. But further he saith, the Elders here defended that he ought not to be public dealt withal for it, because it was not orderly made public. Indeed we hold, that private sins should privately be dealt with, & if any bring in public without private dealing going before (according to the rule given by Christ, Math, 18.15.16.) we suffer it not, but rebuke them that so walk. Whereupon this White himself being by one of the brethren reproved for so dealing with the party aforesaid, 
Mr R. ja.  it seemeth still to stick on his stomach: and the more, because afterward upon speech thereof myself with the rest of the Elders signified our dislike of such disorderly and evil walking. Touching his repentance, such as were then present do testify that he showed it for such things as could be proved against him, & in other things stood upon his clearing. But whatsoever this White hath w●itten here against him, now that he is returned to the Church of England, whither himself also is revolted, the point of his weapon (if there be any sharpness in it) is turned into his own▪ and that Church's bowels.  
The same falleth out in his next instance about adultery. For that man also is declined to the Church of England, and there now liveth. Thus still is he snared in his own words. But yet further see how he dealeth here in that which followeth. He saith, R.B. was publicly accused in our meeting, for creeping in at a window to come to bed to another man's wife. That this is false, is testified by such as were present at the meeting spoken of, & that he did not creep in at a window so to do, we hear is testified even by themselves from whom the speech of these things did first proceed.  
Which being so, why or how should we deal with him publicly thereabout? And touching the man spoken of, it is well known that as he hath sinned, so he hath also repent: having therein before him the example of David in Israel. Where if White had lived, as he hath done among us, would it not have been counted horrible (to use his own word) so to have dealt with them, as he hath dealt with us?  
His next instance is of one of our Elders, Mr St. against whom he objecteth in particular three things; The first, filthiness; and of this (to utter his malice the more) he speaketh four times in a few leaves together, sometimes under the terms of filthiness with his wife's daughter, sometimes of uncleanness, sometimes of incest. For which Mr. St. hath called him before the Magistrates here, for a slanderer, desiring that proof may be brought, or satisfaction made according to justice. The second is, supporting uncleanness in a woman a member of our Church. The woman he hath named 
* Whites disco. p. 7. in the margin.  before to be jud. Hol. For which also she hath called him before the Magistrates of this ci●● where we live. The third is, refusing to pray with his own wif● a member likewise of the same Church. Towchi●g which he saith, h● is persuaded such cases may and do sometimes fall out between man and wife, as while ●he things so continue between them, they may lawfully abstain from prayer the one with the other, using all good means within their own walls to be reconciled together, and to live so each with other as their prayers may not be interrupted: And that he hath not refused to pray with his wife, but in such case and manner. These are the particulars objected, after which a general is annexed of worse carriage than this, often complained of by his wife & committed by him, which the man saith he is ashamed to mention. But as he nameth not the thing so neither doth he mention the persons to whom she hath complained thereof. And if there were not some other cause in it, who can think that he is ashamed to mention any thing, that hath a forehead to write and deal so shamefully as he hath done?  
touching mine own knowledge and dealing about these things (to speak of no other now) this Th. Whites' wife can testify what I did therein a good while since, whereof she hath particular knowledge, and which by this dealing of his I am now constrained to publish. As I remember, about some five years since, there came unto me a brother of the Church yet living, and told me with great heaviness how he heard that Mr St. had lain with his wife's daughter, 
A.P.  and that the matter should be heard publicly in the Church. I told him, this was the first time I heard it, & inquired who it was that reported it to him: which he told me: Then I went myself & inquired from one to another of whom they had it, till by degrees it was brought to Rose Ph. (now the wife of this Th. White) to whom when I came, she did for some things which she had spoken name her authors of whom she heard them, but for this, could name none at all, but confessed it was her own addition: and then showed great sorrow and repentance for her so doing. Now how she was rebuked for this her evil dealing at that time, I need not here to write: But leaving the Reader to lay this dealing of hers then, and this of her husbands now together, and accordingly to esteem thereof: I will proceed to the next instances here alleged.  
They are of jud. Hol. Tho. Can. ja. joh. etc. whom he mentioneth here by name to be open offenders, but showeth not how or wherein. Of jud. Hol. I wrote before, how she hath called him before the Magistrates hereabout. And so hath jacob Ioh: a man that hath laid down his life for the Name of Christ, being for his witness thereof condemned to death, 
At Northampton.  and brought to the place of execution, & then reprieved, & since ●ent away out of the Land as banished. And touching Tho: Ca. himself that here findeth fault for retaining him as being an open offender, doth afterward in a postscript at 
‡ Whites discov. pag 26.  the end of his book, find fault with the casting of him out, as being a man penitent, and therefore not so to be dealt withal, but still to be retained, according to Christ's rule, Mat. 18.22. Luc. 17.4. By his own confession therefore, such as repent of their sins, are to be retained in the Church, and not now to be counted for open offenders. What meaneth he then thus to write of any persons repenting of their sins, as if while such were retained, the Church were not separate from open offenders; or they unfit members for the fellowship thereof.  
But if all these things were as he saith, yet are they not in our constitution, and therefore not of weight against the description aforesaid. Which himself perceiving, attempteth therefore otherwise to prove that even in the constitution of our Church we hold false ways. Where note by the way, how himself yieldeth that the fo●mer evils which he hath objected, are not in our constitution. And as not they, so neither any other. For (as we have said, and are constrained often to repeat it) the calling of Christ and our covenant, which is to obey the faith of the Gospel, excludeth all evil & false ways whatsoever. Yet let us consider the particulars which here he hath alleged  
The first is, that he saith we hold the Lords prayer is not to be used as a prayer, contrary to Christ's express commandment, which is neither against reason nor proportion of faith. I answer, if it be Christ's commandment so to use it, than did the Apostles to whom it was given, both so use it themselves, and teach others likewise to do. Neither of which can be showed. Then ought we always whensoever we pray, to use this for our prayer, seeing Christ's express commandment is, When ye pray, say, Our Father etc. And so the Apostles and Christians in all ages have sinned, when they prayed and said it not. Yea and these men themselves do above all other transgress herein, who pray many times without using of it, and yet think it to be Christ's express commandment, which is neither against reason nor proportion of faith. Yet also when they shall have considered, that it containeth all things, whatsoever from the beginning of the world to the end thereof have been or can be asked aright by any, it would be known with what reason or proportion of faith any particular person or Church can so use it as they speak, without special explication and application of the several heads to themselves and their present occasions.  
Secondly, he saith our opinion is contrary to the tenor of the words, having the form of a prayer in all things, as Our Father, give us, and Amen annexed in the end, which shows that they are petitions not positions or rules which are set down in an other form, Mat. 7.7. & 21.22. 1 joh. 5.14. Answ. If it be intended by the tenor of the words having the form of a prayer, that it should be so used: then besides the answers already made, I ask, Whether we should use it, as it is set down by Matthew, or by Luke. For Luke doth not only vary from Matthew in diverse words, but also omitteth the whole Conclusion, yea and the word Amen, which is here alleged for a proof that it is so to be used as is aforesaid. But in deed other use may be made (than these men do) of the propounding it thus by way of petitions rather than of positions or rules, as in other places is done: Namely, that Christ hereby would show the right manner of praying unto God, that we may with confidence come and speak unto him in our prayers, propounding our requests holily, carefully, reverendly, without babbling, according to our several occasions etc. And so meeteth with the manifold errors that in the use of prayer have crept into the world: as may be seen among the Papists, Neutral-Protestants, Anabaptists, Adamians, Euchetians, and other heretics Idolaters superstitious and ignorant people: some thinking that we should not ourselves come directly to God in prayer, but use the mediation of some Saints or Angels etc. others, that reading on a book is prayer to God, though it be of other men's words prescribed unto us; others, that we should repeat the same things over again and again; others, that we should use sighs without words; others, that we should not pray unto God at all, seeing he knoweth what we need; and others, that we should ever be praying, giving no place either to other exercises of religion, or to any labour of the hands, etc. All which and the like heresies, and abuses of the heavenly and most comfortable use of prayer, Christ hath prevented and condemned by this his direction for prayer, propounded after the form and manner aforesaid.  
3. Thirdly, he saith our opinion is contrary to the use of all Christians, that we read of, as before out of Tertullian and others may be alleged. Answ. Then is it contrary to the use of the Apostles and Primitive Churches of whom we read in the Scriptures. Which if any could show, that alone would end the question: whereas the use & testimony of any other persons Churches or ages cannot do it: As Tertullian himself showeth when he saith, 
Contra Martion. lib. 4. c. 5.  That is truest which is first, that is first which is from the beginning, that is from the beginning which is from the Apostles. But now admitting his proofs were good, that the Lords prayer (as it is called) were to be used as a prayer, yet were it then further needful to be known, whether it be Christ's commandment that we should use it for our prayer alone by itself, or that we should join it with other prayers conceived by ourselves withal. If he say, we should use it alone, his own testimony out of Tertullian (besides their own practice) is against him, who saith, that it being premised as a foundation, 
Lib. de Orat.  other petitions may be built there upon. And if he say, we should join it with the other prayers conceived by ourselves, the practice and testimony of the Apostles is against him. For which see, Mat. 8.25. Act. 1.24.25. and 4.24— 30. Phil. 1.3.4.9.10.11. & 4.6. 1 Thess. 5.17.18.19.23.  
2. The second thing is, that he saith we hold it not lawful for the innocent parties, to retain the offender, as the wife her husband, or the husband his wife, if either party have committed adultery, no though the innocent party upon the others repentance, forgiving the others sin, be desirous still to live with the other party in the marriage covenant as before, but have excommunicated the parties innocent for so doing. This in deed we have held (the most of us) heretofore: and some of us are 
‡ Yet resting with peace in their difference of judgement thereabout.  so persuaded still. And while we were generally so minded, we also held it our duty accordingly to walk, taking the innocent party that retained such offenders, though upon their repentance, yet to be defiled and to live in sin with them, as 
* 1 Cor. 6.16.  coupling themselves with an harlot, But since upon further consideration of this question, discussing it among ourselves, when we could not find divorce in the Scriptures any where commanded, but 
* Mat. 19  permitted only; and that such offenders repenting thereof, are not to be reputed in that case of harlots, but to be 
† 1 Cor. 6.9.11.  washed from their sin & levied in jesus Christ: we have upon these and other like reasons altered our former judgement, and now have thus observed and agreed thus concerning this matter, That where the Magistrates inflict not death upon such offenders (as by the law of God they should) it is in the liberty and power of the innocent party, either for that crime to put away the offender, or upon their repentance to retain them: But this with these cautions, 1. So as themselves were no means or cause of the others so transgressing. 2. That they be no nourishers of them in the like for time to come. 3. That this remission and acceptance of the offender by the innocent party be done before sufficient winesses. 4. That this also (as the marriage at the first) be alway in the Lord. And for the Churches & the Minister's duty therein, that it is only to teach and require of them repentance, after the example of Christ, joh. 8.10.11. or else to see them cast out of the Church, according to the Apostles doctrine, 1 Cor. 5.11.12.13. This is that which now the most of us do think concerning this question: being notwithstanding ready to hear, if any can show us better from the word of God, which is the ground and rule of the constitution of our Church.  
Touching the case and excommunication of H. C. and E. H. his wife (of which he speaketh both here and afterward again) how will he prove the persons spoken of to be repentant, when as the one of them denied the fact, which she had before confessed to two of the brethren; & the other in the judgement of the Church showed himself unrepentant many ways, which I will not here mention. And if he do not show them to have repent, how hath he proved that for which he alleged them? Besides that there were also other causes for which they were excommunicated.  
As for that which he saith, diverse of us have accused themselves of adultery that so they might be rid of their wives: this also he should have proved, and not only have said it. For we know that the persons whom he nameth (W. H. and T. C.) have said and avouched earnestly, that they did it not to that end, but being persuaded that they ought not to continue with their wives, having by their adultery broken the bond of marriage between them. Besides, if by him or any it could be proved so to be as he saith, he knoweth we would not bear with such wickedness, but deal with them according to their demerit: howsoever without all shame he do thus abuse us.  
And here by the way let me a little note this man's crossing of himself, and bad dealing against us still. Before in the beginning of his book, he imputed unto us abounding with adulteries, and that above others, as if it were a sin common and borne withal among us, and this also more than among others. Yet here now his objection against us, about the case of adultery, is such, as any may see he thinketh we have been too severe therein, and that above others. What this our opinion was, is showed before. Wherein although we have changed our judgement, as is aforesaid: yet even this particular showeth how greatly we have alway detested that sin, and how contrary this White is to himself, that he might by any means deal wretchedly against us.  
3. The third thing is, that he saith we have altered many things which we held in our constitution, as among other, that it was not lawful for Apostates to bear office. He saith, many things, yet nameth but one. touching which I might answer, that although many of us did in deed so take it, yet it was not here so generally received by all as he seemeth to suppose, because that as there was diverse times occasion of question about it, there were of the brethren that showed themselves to be diversly minded: but at length the matter being often and much urged, we did thus agree about it, That we think it not meet to choose such into office as have before time declined from the truth, without good caution first had thereabout: As namely, 1. That there be consideration had both of the nature of the thing done, & of the quality of the person, & of the estate of the Church. 2. That the Church have good and due trial of such being returned, afore they choose them into office. 3. That with these cautions, the fittest be taken into office whom God giveth in the present estate of the Church. And all these things so minded and observed of us, as if at any time a better way be showed out of the word of God, we be ready to receive it in the Lord. This is that whereof hitherto we have agreed about this matter: the particulars whereof there will be occasion to set down more at large hereafter. But now admitting that the whole Church held it not lawful for such to bear office, & afterward altered it (as here he saith): yet was this alteration but of our judgement and practice, not of the Church's constitution, as I have showed before: and therefore his collection hereupon (that we held false ways in our constitution, & by consequent, then were no true Churches) is both false & frivolous.  
4. The fourth he propoundeth as a question, saying of us, What would it profit them to b● free from false ways in their constitution, ● their practice be not according to their profession? But the question and point here treated on is, whether the description aforesaid be true, or not; and whether we ourselves be a true Church according unto it? If we err in practice, is it therefore a false description, or we a false Church? The Churches of Asia and Achaia erred greatly in their practice, were they not therefore true Churches according to the said description?  
But yet where the practice is not according to the profession, it makes the sin the more grievous. True, and therefore Tho: White his sin is unspeakably grievous, as all they do know who have seen what great and earnest profession of the truth he hath made heretofore, from which now he is grievously fallen.  
But for ourselves he asketh further, sith their knowledge is but in part aswell as their love, are not they aswell as others subject to err in constitution aswell as practise? If he mean in judgement aswell as practise, we grant it: and we have always professed it: howsoever he write against us, as if we were such as professed perfection of knowledge and practice in this life: from which error himself knoweth us to be as far, as we know him to be from truth and godliness. But if he mean by our constitution, the way of God wherein we are set, the calling of Christ with the Church's covenant, which giveth being unto the Church, than I answer, that difference must be put between the way of God itself, and our weak walking therein; between the calling of Christ together with the covenant of the Church, & our sinning and transgressing in our own ways notwithstanding; between the Church considered in Christ the head thereof, in whom we are washed from all our sins, guided in in the way of truth, and preserved to eternal life, and between the Church considered in the members thereof, as we are in ourselves every one sinful and subject daily to err both in judgement and practice: And this not only in the members severally, but in all of us jointly together. If this distinction be not observed, who can show that ever there was or can be true Church upon the earth, or how we can have true comfort in this life to ourselves, or esteem and discern aright between things that differ, as we ought? And if it be observed, any may see that all his exceptions against us are of no moment. It is not our knowledge or practice, but our calling & covenant in Christ that secludeth in our constitution all false and evil ways, whether as yet seen or not.  
For which cause also I need not here stand upon his needles and erroneous discourse about that which he calleth a shift, though in deed it be a point much to be respected, namely, 
‡ Of this, I think myself have had speech with this Th. White heretofore howsoever now he write as if he had never heard it of any of us.  that a true Church must be separate from all false ways, which they see. For as I have showed already, we ought if we will consider aright of a Church, to look at their calling and covenant in Christ, which is from all false ways whatsoever, seen or unseen, to the obedience of faith. Howsoever therefore we have erred or may err in judgement or practice (as we and all men in this life are alway subject to do) yet doth it not therefore follow, either that the description aforesaid is not good, or that we are not a true Church notwithstanding.  
Further touching ourselves, we acknowledge & profess before all men, that diverse things heretofore observed among us at the first, we have since altered and do from time to time alter and amend, as God giveth us by his word to discern better therein: Yea and hereunto are we bound and have power in Christ even by the constitution of our Church. So free from all false ways is the constitution itself, and yet we that are in it subject to err notwithstanding many ways. So far are we also from the strange opinion and impiety of them, that having in this latter age of the world disclaimed the Pope's person and rec●iv●d some truths of the Gospel, yet retaining many abominations of Antichrist withal, would now stand still, and admit of no further proceeding or alteration among them. As if they had at first seen & received the whole truth and all the ordinances of Christ. Or as if Antichrist should not now by degrees be discovered and consumed, as heretofore he rose up and was exalted. 2 Thes. 2. Rev. 14. and 17. and 18. and 19 chap. with jer. 51.25.26.45.46.  
And now by that which hath been said let the Reader observe, whether this fellow have not entrapped himself and his mother Church, while he thought to have ensnared us. Neither let any be so simple, as to give credit in the cause of religion to any, further or otherwise but as warrant and confirmation is brought out of the word of God, which is the ground and rule of all truth; nor to refuse that which is approved by it, for the aberration, opposition, or calumniation of any whosoever they be.  
His abuse both here and other where in his book, of that which we have published in print, I leave also to the Reader to observe, and for himself to answer to him that knoweth his heart. As for I. N. whom he nameth in particular more than others whom he would insinuate, for borrowing and making no conscience to pay again: he hath called him before the Magistrates here, as others before mentioned: affirming & offering to show how in the very particular alleged by White (when he was here demanded his proof) for thus divulging him, he hath offered his creditor goods sufficient for his debt with overplus: and having had to deal with him for much, hath satisfied all to a little, yet remaining: having also had hindrance by the sickness and otherwise. And for the general, we acknowledge that men ought to be careful both how they borrow and how they pay again, and should measure these, as all other affairs, with judgement and conscience, according to godliness. Psal. 37.21. and 112.5. Rom. 13.8. And we know also, that yet notwithstanding it is the case sometime of men fearing God, not only to be but even to die in debt: As we read of one of the sons of the Prophets; 2 King. 4.1.  
But all this which hitherto he hath said, being not enough, either for the vent of his own rancour and malice against us, or to please our adversaries whose favour he would purchase by traducing of us: he now further pretendeth to frame an opposition between our practice, & the Treatise entitled, A true description out of the word of God, of the visible Church: thus setting himself to seek and abuse against us whatsoever he can out of any of our writings. To show his wicked dealing herein as it is, would require to insist upon the particulars of that description, and to compare therewith the estate and walking of our Church: & that would ask a long treatise, which here I purpose not. It shall suffice, that the Reader, especially such as have knowledge of our Church which he blameth, and of the Church of England to which he is returned, do compare them both with that description: and accordingly esteem of both as he shall find the estate of them to be in deed and in truth. Thereby also will plainly appear, how this adversary neither writeth nor walketh in the fear of God: to whom notwithstanding he must give account of all these things. And for the particulars he mentioneth, that the equity of our cause and iniquity of his dealing may better appear, I will in the treating of them first set down the words of that description from whence he would draw his opposition, and then speak of the particulars themselves.  
And first, for the body of the Church considered in her parts (as here he would seem to except against us from one to another, through the several parts of this body) thus it is set down in that description of a true Church, 
A true descript. of a visible Church.  Pag. 2. surely if this Church be considered in her parts, it shall appear most beautiful, yea most wonderful, and even ravishing the senses to conceive, much more to behold, what then to enjoy so blessed a communion. For behold her King and Lord is the King of peace, and Lord himself of all glory. She enjoyeth most holy and heavenly laws, most faithful & vigilant Pastors, most sincere & pure Teachers, most careful and upright Governors, most diligent and trusty Deacons, most loving and sober Relievers, and a most humble, meek, obedient, faithful, & loving people, every stone living elect and precious, every stone hath his beauty, his burden, and his order. All bound to edify one another, exhort, reprove, & comfort one another lovingly as to their own members, faithfully as in the eyes of God. Thus it standeth in that description. touching which now I would ask, 1. Whether he hold this description herein to be true and agreeable to the word of God. 2. Whether he dare deny jesus Christ to be the King and Lord of our Church. 3. Whether he acknowledge him only to be the King & Lord of every true visible Church upon the earth. 4. Whether these be the Offices and functions which he as Lord and King hath appointed to his Church, namely, Pastors, Teachers, Elders, Deacons, Relievers. 5. Whether these be had in the Church of England to which he is now gone, and in whom they are there to be found. 6. Whether the Church Officers there be so qualified, as here is set down. 7. Finally, whether if any would compare the estate of that Church, in the body, officers, members, laws, and walking thereof, with the description of a true visible Church out of the word of God, he might not make another manner treatise and other manner of objections against them, than this Priest of theirs doth against us.  
But to proceed, for the Pastor (with which office he beginneth first) thus are his qualities and duties set down in that description of a true Church, Pag. 3. Their Pastor must be apt to teach, no young Sch●ler, able to divide the word aright, holding fast that faithful word according to doctrine, that he may also be able to exhort, rebuke, improve, with whomsome doctrine, & to convince them that say against it: He must be a man that loveth goodness: he must be wise, righteous, holy, temperate: he must be of life unreprovable, as God's Steward: he must be generally well reported of, and one that ruleth his own household under obedience with all honesty: he must be modest, humble, meek, gentle, & loving: he must be a man of great patience, compassion, labour and diligence: he must alway be careful and watchful over the flock whereof the Lord hath made him overseer, with all willingness and cheerfulness, not holding his office in respect of persons, but doing his duty to every soul, as he will answer before the chief Shepherd, etc. And afterward, pag. 4. The pastors office is, to feed the sheep of Christ in green and wholesome pastures of his word, and lead them to the still waters, even to the pure fountain and river of life. He must guide and keep those sheep by that heavenly sheephook and pastoral staff of the word, thereby drawing them to him, thereby looking into their souls, even into their most secret thoughts: Thereby discerning their diseases, and thereby curing them: applying to every disease a fit and convenient medicine, & according to the quality and danger of the disease, give warning to the Church, that they may orderly proceed to excommunication. Further, he must by this his sheephook watch over and defend his flock from ravenous beasts and the Wolf, and take the little foxes, etc. Thus far that description. Now among these qualities and duties he excepteth only about two: the one concerning patience, the other love and compassion: Which also are such, as it is fitter for the Church & people with whom I have lived, to speak therein then myself. Neither will I set to excuse myself, knowing how subject I am to fall into infirmity, and to fail in duty otherwise then I ought or would.  
1. Therefore touching the former, which is of impatiency, I will not stand to speak what I could, about the persons whom he nameth in particular, the dealing then used, the Discourse now written, the other witnesss unmentioned, and the like: Neither to allege, how deserved reproof and severity is oftentimes accounted too much sharpness and impatiency; and that anger sometimes is both needful and lawful etc. But omitting these things, I will for myself answer this, that I am a man subject to like passions as others be. And if Moses that man of God and 
* Num. 12.3.  meekest of all men on the earth, yet had this spirit so vexed, as he spoke unadvisedly with his lips: 
Ps. 106.33.  what am I that I should not much more so think and acknowledge of myself, who am so privy to my own weakness, as I am?  
2. And for the second thing, which is concer●ing love and compassion, why should I think otherwise but that I may sometimes fail therein? Yet this man for it of all other might have laid his hand on his mouth, to whom (when at fi●st he came a stranger & poor into these countries) I gave meat and drink and lodging about nine or ten weeks together, till he returned again into England.  
touching my Father (of whom he speaketh in particular) I do and will alway acknowledge that I was so bound to him both by nature and for his care and charge of my bringing up, as I never did or could do enough to show myself sufficiently thankful. And what then should I do speaking of any thing I have done by any means that way? And in particular for the time when he was here, what I did & offered him to do, at his coming hither, remaining here, and going from hence, with other particulars that might be noted, I will not here speak neither, what myself could if it were another's case, or what diverse others know and could testify if it were needful. Neither will I stand to show what I could touching the pretence which he maketh about his being here in necessity.  
Of M. Sl. his abuse of me and manner of dealing at the time here intended, I will forbear also to speak what he knoweth I might. If he at that time spoke hereof (as here is affirmed) why might I not pass by it with silence, as I did at the same time a multitude of his railings & contumelies, as White himself & the many witnesses then present did see and can testify, if they will? When Shemei railed on David, and Rabshakeh on Israel, David held his peace, and Hezekiahs' people answered not a word. 2 Sam, 16.5— 13. 2 King. 18.36. Yet now I thought good to speak and write thus much considering there is a time to speak, as there is a time to keep silence. Eccles. 3.7. Pro. 26.4 5.  
But to leave these men, that which I will here speak further is this only, that it is needful for all in all things carefully to observe and follow the rules prescribed by Christ, 
Deut. 5.32 1 Tim. 5.21. Mat. 10.37.  not declining to the right hand or to the left; not preferring one to another; not yielding to our own affections & desires, but submitting them alway to the will and love of God. As we read, that Levi was commended of Moses and blessed of God, for not respecting father, mother, brethren, or children, but preferring before them the keeping of the word and covenant of the Lord: Deu. 33.8.9. And it is noted in the description aforesaid, among the Pastor's duties there mentioned, that he hold not his office in respect of persons, but do his duty to every soul, as he will answer before the chief Shepherd. In the performance whereof also the Pastor and other Elders and governors of the Church are to be accounted and regarded as Fathers. But I will no further insist hereupon: neither speak I these things to excuse myself in any thing I have done or omitted otherwise then I should. I acknowledge my sins are many and my infirmities great: and my strength and salvation is only in the Lord jesus: For whose sake I have (through his mercy) suffered much rebuke, and I trust shall patiently bear it to the end.  
Next he cometh to speak of the Teacher, whose qualities and duties are thus set down in the description aforesaid, Pag. 3. Their Doctor or Teacher must be a man apt to teach, able to divide the word of God aright, and to deliver sound and wholesome doctrine from the same, still building upon that sound groundwork, he must be mighty in the Scriptures, able to convince the gainsayers, and careful to deliver his doctrine pure, sound and plain, not with curiosity or affectation, but so that he may edify the most simple, approving it to every man's conscience: he must be of life unreprovable, one that can govern his own household, he must be of manners sober, temperate, modest, gentle and loving, etc. And afterward, Pag. 5. His special care must be to build upon that only true groundwork, gold, silver, and precious stones, that his work may endure the trial of the fire, and by the light of the same fire, reveal the Timber, Hay, & Stubble of false Teachers: He must take diligent heed to keep the Church from errors. And further he must deliver his doctrine so plainly, simply, & purely, that the Church may increase with the increasing of God, and grow up unto him which is the head, Christ jesus. Hitherto is that description: wherein the qualities and duties set down, be many and great.  
1. Yet cannot this Adversary satisfy himself with them all as he would: and therefore coming to make exceptions against the Teacher, he fetcheth his first, out of the general description of the Church spoken of before, objecting that the Teacher is sleyned with hypocrisy: and to prove it he allegeth his dealing concerning G. I. M. Sl. Yet showeth it not so much as in any one particular: thinking belike that some are so simple in themselves or so set against us, as they will take his word for proof sufficient, who neither knoweth that dealing himself, & in the things which he knoweth can lie so notoriously, as if he had the art of lying and would be a teacher thereof unto others.  
2. The second thing he objecteth, is apostasy: because that many years since having received this cause he did sometimes yield to hear the Ministry of the Church of England. But since that time hath so approved himself among us, both in the witness of the truth & in the service of the Church, as hath been for the great help and comfort of us all, and myself in particular bound to testify concerning him, as Paul did of Marcus Barnabas sister's son, that that he hath been my workfellow unto the kingdom of God, which hath been to my consolation. Col. 4.10.11. For the question itself and our account of Apostasy, I shall write more particularly hereafter.  
3. The third thing is, that he saith he hath been a means to bring in and defend false doctrines. But what be they? First, The latter of those two before mentioned. Now that latter was about apostasy in the matter aforesaid. So as then himself accounteth them to be apostates, that having held our cause do afterward yield to hear the Ministry of the Church of England; and that it is a false doctrine, that any such may afterward bear office in the Church. And what then is this Whites own case, who being a Minister of the Church of England, left both that Church and Ministry, and received our cause, and witnessed the truth against them, and yet now hath yielded not only to hear but even to execute himself the ministery of that Church again?  
But he will say, that among the Errata (at the end of his book) he noted this for one, that for the word (latter) we should here read, former. I have observed it: and well in deed might he note it among his Errata, who even while he would blame others of error, doth so strangely err himself as to put latter for former, one contrary for another. But this might be an oversight (as often falleth out in printing) which therefore I would not have noted, but that I think there is a worse thing in it: namely, that at first he both wrote and meant it of the latter, which is about apostasy, until he had himself apostate from the truth and executed again his Ministry received from the Prelates in England: and thereupon now would alter it, measuring the doctrines of religion, not by the word of God, but as may best serve his own turn. And I am persuaded the rather thus to think for these reasons: 1 because when he began to set himself to be an enemy of this Church and could not prevail as he desired, he then began to make question about apostasy, whether any such might bear office in the Church: 2. If we understand it here of the former, as his Errata now would have it read, it is nothing to the purpose at all: seeing there is in it no speech of any points of doctrine, but of hypocrisy; and seeing an hypocrite may notwithstanding teach true doctrine. For else it would follow, that neither judas nor White himself did heretofore teach true doctrine when they preached, because judas was and he is an hypocrite, both of them through hypocrisy betraying Christ into the hands of his enemies.  
His other proof of false doctrines which he pretendeth is set down after his wonted manner, others that may be alleged: yet not naming any, which no doubt he would have done if he could, or if he durst adventure the trial of them with the Teacher of our Church whom he thus envieth and abuseth, who notwithstanding for his learning, wisdom, and godliness, as also for his faithful teaching of the Church and upright walking toward all, is so well known & approved, as neither he nor we need regard any adversaries malice & opposition against him.  
After this he cometh from the teaching to the ruling Elders, whose properties and duties are thus noted in the description abovesaid, Pag. 4. Their Elders must be of wisdom and judgement, endued with the Spirit of God, able to discern between cause and cause, between plea and plea, and accordingly to prevent and redress evils, always vigilant & intending to see the statutes, ordinances, and laws of God kept in the Church, and that not only by the people in obedience, but to see the Officers do their duties. These men must be of life likewise unreprovable, governing their own families orderly, they must be also of manners sober, gentle, modest, loving, temperate, etc. And afterward again, pag. 5. Their especial care must be, to see the ordinances of God truly taught & practised, aswell by the Officers in doing their duty uprightly, as to see that the people obey willingly and readily. It is their duty to see the Congregation holily and quietly ordered, and no way disturbed, by the contentious and disobedient, froward and obstinate: not taking away the liberty of the least, but upholding the right of all, wisely judging of times and circumstances. They must be ready assistants to the Pastor and Teachers, helping to bear their burden, but not intruding into their office. Thus is the description. Now touching our Elders, he taketh here his exception against two of them. The first is, Mr Da. St. against whom it may be he is the more eagerly carried, because he discerned so quickly into him, being a notable white hypocrite, and dealt so plainly & roundly with him as he did: And therefore also exc●pteth not a word against him, for his ability to discern into persons and causes and to deal with them accordingly, nor for sundry other of the properties and duties here required, though they be many and weighty. Yet some things he speaketh of, which he had twice before, besides that which he hath also hereafter: so as I need not repeat and speak of them, as he doth again and again. Yet somewhat more I will note here touching the particulars excepted out of the description.  
1. The first is, of being endued with the Spirit of God: Of which we have seen many and great testimonies in Mr St. from time to tyme. He hath been an ancient disciple of Christ in the faith of the Gospel this many years; He hath given up his life for the name of the Lord, being adjudged to death, & so remaining many years under the sentence and daily expectation thereof, till he was banished; He now liveth still an exile for the same truth of Christ; And in the government of the Church hath had to deal with so many causes, persons, and dispositions (yea oppositions also of sundry people) as if he had not been endued with the spirit of God, & that in great measure, he had never been able so to have endured & waded through them all, as he hath done. Which also may both strengthen himself still in the Lord, & stop the mouth of all his adversaries. And for this Th. White himself, let it here be considered: 1. Whether he be fit to bear any office at all, yea or to be so much as a member in the Church of God, if he be tried but by this one particular, of being endued with the Spirit of God. 2 With what spirit he hath written this book of his. 3. Whether he have not therein many times and sundry ways blasphemed the holy spirit of God. For which he shall answer to the Lord.  
2. The second thing is, that he saith he would defend the transgressing of the laws of God in himself and others. Note, that he saith not he hath done it, but that he would do it. And how shows he this? Not so much as by pretence of any one particular for proof thereof, Yet this is the man that would persuade his Reader he could make due proof of any thing he layeth to our charge.  
3. The third thing is, about the governing of his house: for which he referreth to that he hath else where cited, and so do I to that which is there said. Yet let himself take this withal, that if the things be true which are reported and observed concerning his own family, he might have found work enough at home, and cause enough to cast a beam out of his own eye. But I will not follow his course in this manner (howsoever it might be just) to deal with him as he doth with others.  
4. The fourth is, of cruelty and tyranny: for proof whereof he allegeth that some of our own members have complained, that if they had a matter as clear as the sun against him, yet durst they not deal with him for it. But who be these some he speaketh of? why doth he not name them at all? Or would he have us to think that they be some such as hate the light, knowing that their works are evil, and whom he therefore concealeth: that he might show himself with his fellows Mr P●. and the rest to be fit receivers for such reporters? Or why did he not observe, that the Elders must be men of wisdom and judgement, able to discern between cause and cause, plea & plea, & that it is their duty to repress the contentious & disobedient, froward and obstinate? Which by whomsoever it be done, who can otherwise think but such will be as ready to open their mouths against them, as they are to please themselves in their own eyes? But howsoever they may for a while lurk & walk in the dark, yet God in his time will bring them to light & discover them, as he hath done this White himself & sundry other the like heretofore.  
5. The other of the Elders he speaketh of, is Mr St. Mer. against whom he excepteth for Apostasy. The matter was thus. About thirteen years since, a little while after he was come to this cause which we profess, being in the country with his friends, he was there persuaded that he would hear some of the Ministers of the Church of England preach: Which he did once: And straightway after being affected therewith, did it no more. Which also he made known himself, whereas otherwise it was unknown to us. Now after that time living with the Church, and being well approved among us, he was about five years since chosen to be one of the Elders. Thus is the case: wherein now mark this hypocrites dealing. The qualities and duties required in the Elders being so many and great, as in the description are noted: was there nothing whereat he could except, but this only? And was his malice such, as rather than he would say nothing, he would except even for that which himself accounteth to be good and lawful? Let such dealing then return into his own bosom, and be a comfort to such as be thus abused by him.  
From the Elders, he cometh to the Deacons, whose qualities & office is set down in the aforesaid description of a true Church, pag. 4. Their Deacons must be men of honest report, having the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience, endued with the holy Ghost: they must be grave, temperate, not given to excess, nor to filthy lucre. And afterward again, Pag. 5. The Deacons office is faithfully to gather & collect by the ordinance of the Church, the goods and benevolence of the faithful, and by the same direction, diligently and trustily to distribute them according to the necessity of the Saints: Further they must inquire and consider of the proportion of the wants both of the Officers and other poor, and accordingly relate unto the Church, that provision may be made. Here he excepteth only against one of our Deacons, Mr C. Bow. To whom about eleven years since, the Magistrates of Narden did once (and not weekly, as this man intimateth) send a little money to be given to the poor of the Church: which he together with one of the Elders (Mr. G. Kniston) did accordingly bestow upon such as they judged to stand most in need. Whereof because goodwife Colg. (the woman of whom he speaketh) had not a part, thereupon by her means it seemeth was this report raised of Mr. Bow. which now this fellow hath published: and for which with his many such like instances, he is by Mr B. called before the Magistrates as a slanderer. And touching the woman no marvel if she so abused him, who hath since in other things carried herself so ungodly, as she is cast out of the Church, and so remaineth. And for Mr. Bow: how well he hath approved himself in his office, I shall not need to relate: neither need he regard any slanderoous tongue or pen, knowing his own integrity, and having the Church's testimony, to which he hath with good approbation ministered in that office now about fourteen years.  
After this dealing with sundry of our officers in particular, the adversary cometh to speak of the Elders jointly. Against whom he objecteth, that we called R.W. (that is Rose White his wife) before us in the first place, for a private thing. But it was, for that her child was kept unbaptized; and for that we heard she had entertained Ma. Sl. at her table, who is a man excommunicated by our Church, whereof she was then a member. For these things only was she called before the Elders: and for the first, together with her apostasy from the truth which before time she had professed with us, she was a while after excommunicated by ●he whole Church. For the latter whenas she answered that it was her husbands doing, without her liking, and against her will (though not so signified unto him) & that herself gave the excommunicate no countenance as approving his estate, we rested therein: instructing her only how to carry herself in such cases for time to come, & exhorting her to be careful accordingly to walk as by the word of God we have rule and direction. Now for the hypocrite her husband himself, whereas he saith here, the Church of Christ do privately admonish a private sin of a holy and loving affection: how will he show this in the Church of England, whither he is gone? or doth he hold it not to be the Church of Christ? or that it is by some privilege not bound to the ordinances of Christ? Not to speak how himself by his own mouth is condemned, whiles he acknowledgeth that Christians ought thus to walk, & yet publisheth he careth not what, things private or public, true or false, and that with a wicked and malicious affection.  
Lastly, from the officers he cometh to the people: objecting against them uncleanness, cozening, disgracing, backbiting, and undermining one of another amongst themselves. But this only in general terms: And so might any unclean mouth, and backbiting slanderer, traduce any people in the world. Will he now then apply to himself & to his practice and 
† The Prelate of Lond. etc.  consorts in this work, that which the Prophet speaks, With our tongue will we prevail; our lips are our own; who is Lord over us? Psal. 12.4. Why boastest thou thyself in malice, o man of power? the loving kindness of God endureth every day. Thy tongue imagineth mischief, it is like a sharp razor, o thou worker of deceit. Thou lovest evil more then good, lies more than to speak the truth. Selah. Thou lovest all words that may destroy, o deceitful tongue.  
But above all, mark now the wickedness and blasphemy of his conclusion of this point. Which that it may the better appear, & with less prejudice of others be regarded, I will put the case in an instance of Jacob's family, before Christ's coming in the flesh, and of the Church of Corinth, since Christ's time: and therein will allege (not things forged, perverted, and abused, as this enemy doth against us) but true things only and such as are recorded in the Scriptures themselves. That the family of jacob was the Church of God, cannot be denied. Now in it we find, 
Gen. 29. & 30. & 31. & 34.  that jacob having two wives and two concubines, his wives envied one another; Rachel stale away her Father's idols; Dinah his daughter was deflowered; his sons deceitfully beguiled the Sichemites; Simeon and Levi slew them in a rage; 
Gen. 34. & 35. & 37. & 38. chap.  Reuben committed incest with Bilhah his father's concubine; the other brothers hated envied and sold joseph into Egypt; and coloured it with living to jacob their father; judah lay with Thamar his daughter in law, taking her to be an whore, etc., Will now any man of knowledge and fearing God infer therefore hereupon, and say, Were these then the Church▪ the Saints, the Israel of God? Were these the fathers of the tribes of Israel, so greatly renowned through all posterity? Were these the stones, the precious stones, embossed in the High priests Breastplate? Were these the twelve patriarchs for the time of the Law, answerable to the twelve Apostles for the time of the Gospel? Yet such you see are the conclusions, but in deed the delusions, of this blasphemous wretch.  
But see it further in the Church of Corinth under the Gospel. In which, 
Epist. to he Corinhians.  were schisms and dissensions, strife & envying, wrath and backbiting; uncleanness and wantonness, fornication and incest, hurting and jnjurying one of another, abusing of Christian liberty, sitting in the Idols temple at the Idols feast, declining from the Lords ordinance in the use of the Sacraments, prayer and prophecy; denying of the resurrection, etc. If now this white painted hypocrite had lived in that age and Church, as he did with us of late, would he nothing have respected their faith, their order, their constitution, wherein they were set by the Apostle: but reproachfully have concluded and inferred against them, as here he doth, saying, Are these then this beautiful? yea most wonderful Church, ravishing the senses to conceive of it? are these the Saints then marching in such a heavenly & gracious array, where every stone hath his beauty, his burden, and his order, where no law is wrongfully wrested, or wilfully neglected, no truth hid or perverted? Thus indeed he shall show himself to be one of those Ministers of Satan (spoken of in that Epistle) who can transform himself as though he were a Minister of righteousness; 
2 Cor. 11.13.14.15.  whose e●d ●hal be according to his works: howsoever f●r a time he may d●lude many poor souls and frustrate their expectation, as already he hath done.  
As for W. Ha. & E. Ha. whose words (as if they were of weight) he recordeth, he should have remembered, that these his companions are such whose mouth is no slander, two such like as himself, poor souls in deed as touching faith and godliness, but abundantly rich (so to speak) in dissembling, lying, railing, backbiting etc. and therefore fit witnesses for such an accuser, their own sayings fit testimonies against themselves, that they never needed to have separated themselves from the Church of England, as they did, being such also as this society would quickly have thrust them out from among us, so living and practising as they do. No marvel then if when they had seen our estate, they were frustrate of their expectation, & therefore returned again to the Church of England, knowing it to be a fit cage for such birds.  
And hitherto of the second head of his Treatise, concerning the ●●scription of a visible Church. According to which, if we would compare the estate of the Church of England, in the members, officers, worship, ministration, etc. as he hath done ours: let the Reader consider, whether it would not in truth be found so clear a testimony against them and their practice, as neither he nor all his consorts (the Prelates and their chaplains) could ever be able to turn away. Neither that only, but even their own description of a visible Church, as it is set down in their Articles of religion agreed upon in the year 1562. Artic. 19 which is thus, The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same. Which (to use his own words) is a clear testimony, 
Answ. to Mr, H. I. p. 14. etc.  & a pregnant sentence of condemnation against themselves and their practice. Of which also I have otherwhere spoken heretofore, which yet re●ayneth unanswered.   

Of the third head of Th: White his Treatise.  
THe third is, that he saith we condemn others, in those things that we would and do practise ourselves. Which he pretendeth to show in diverse instances.  
1. The first is, For communicating with open offenders. For which he refererth to that which is before showed: and so do we: Adding this further, that our Church is so far from communicating with such, as it excommunicateth them, when once they are convinced and found obstinate: which himself knoweth to be true.  
2. The second is, for making men swear to accuse themselves. A thing which neither myself practised to I. L. (as here he falsely objecteth) neither is at all practised among us either publicly or privately that I know of. And for the matter of incest so reproachfully divulged against M St. this man knoweth himself that Rose White his own wife was the raiser of that opprobrious report, that he had lain with hi● wives daughter: and that she both confessed it unto me herself, & could not deny it here before the Magistrates, when she was by Mr St. now of late brought before them about it: as this man himself also is for a slanderer, as I showed before. For his not denying it for the clearing of himself, though he were requested for the satisfying of weak brethren so to do, he saith that he remembreth it not. But being thus dealt withal, he hath written this answer himself, which here I will annex out of his own writing given unto me hereabout. The malice and envy of this T. W. (against me Da. Stud.) hath appeared to be exceeding great, both in his often speaking of me in his book as he hath done, and especially in this place, where making an end of mentioning my name, he thought he would power forth his rancour to the full, Therefore thus he saith, Yet would not their Elder Da. Stud. never so much as deny the matter of incest with his wife's daughter, for the clearing of himself, though he were requested for the satisfying of weak brethren so to do. In these words of his, he would make the world believe as if some came unto me in friendly wise to know whether I had committed incest or no, and as if they required my direct answer unto it for the satisfijng of weak brethren. To which his words I answer: First thus: That there never came any so unto me as he falsely forgeth, and therefore herein he lieth egregiously. Secondly I ask why he did not set down what my answer was to such as he insinuateth came unto me. For if my answer were evil, no doubt he would not have spared to set it down: if it were good, they would and ought to have rested in it. Further it is to be minded, that he hath not named them that came unto me, which if he had done, himself saw that then his wickedness would the more appear. Thirdly this I do affirm, That such as have spoken unto me (about this slander and reproach raised of me) in any christian and orderly manner, I have answered them to their full satisfaction: and to such as disorderly and reproachfully have spoken to me thereof, I have, (minding the persons as I esteemed them) either passed by them with silence, or else urged them to do the worst they could unto me, being ready to answer them according to their dealing with me, as I have now endeavoured to do with this T. W. & Rose his wife (the first author of this accusation) whom I have called before the Magistrates, for slandering of me. Fourthly being thus provoked by him, my answer now is, That if T.W. with his father if he were living (being reputed to have skill in the black art) had the help of him, and of all the devils in hell joined together, yet should he never be able to prove this his wicked slander upon me. Moreover I would demand these things of T.W. as followeth: First whether he will deny that his father spoke thus of him, I miss my aim if ever this my son T.W. do prove a good man. Secondly, whether he will deny that he knows not some that can tell of his evil dealing about Cloaks. Thirdly whether he will deny that he hath not dealt ill with some about a Bible. Fourthly: whether he will deny that he hath committed the like sin as T.C. hath, whom he mentioneth in his book. Lastly I ask him, whether if he do not presently deny these things, or any the like, that by any shallbe demanded of him, he be content to have it taken for granted that then he is guilty of them. If this be his judgement, let him take it to himself, as wise as he will be otherwise minded. And thus I leave him & this his dealing and account thereof, to him that judgeth righteously, and so end with this saying, An hypocrite with his mouth hurteth his neighbour, but the righteous shallbe delivered by knowledge, 
Pro. 11, 9,  Da. St.  
3. In the third, he hath again couched diverse untruths together. As when he saith we condemn the Dutch Churches, for baptizing the seed of those that are not members of their Church. Which is not so: but we dislike in the Dutch Church of this town, that they baptize the seed of them who are not members of any visible Church, and beside admit not the parents themselves to the Lords supper. Great difference there is between these two, 
Confess. with Mr jun. letters. pag. 54.  not to be members of their Church, and, not to be members of any visible Church. And this it seemeth himself perceived, and therefore kept not our words, as he had them set down in the book alleged by himself. But yet more, in that he saith myself with the rest could offer to receive Mr Deuxburies' child to baptism, who neither was neither would join himself a member unto us. For Mr Deuxb. (who dwelled about fifteen miles from us) being desirous that we would baptise his child, we wrote unto him that we could not admit of it, 
And that we might & would, if he did thus.  unless he would make profession of the same faith with us, & be careful so to walk, either with us or with some other Church, in the same truth of the Gospel, as God for his dwelling & estate should give him opportunity. Which he not performing we baptised not his child. And of this refusal of ours, himself spoke but a day or two before his death, to one of the members of our Church, 
W. Simson.  a soldier who was then with him in the army where he was slain. Which things being so, how then should it be as he saith further, that we were offended at G: I. for withstanding it, when we ourselves so wrote and dealt in it, as is aforesaid. Or how had he any hand in this business, when Mr Deuxb. writing to one of the Elders, had answer from them all jointly, of whom he was none?  
4. In the fourth, his bad dealing doth yet further appear: it being a matter, wherewith himself is acquainted, and yet propoundeth not the case truly, as he knoweth it to be. We have indeed misliked in the Dutch Church (not Churches, as he speaketh) of Amsterdan that consisting of so great a multitude, it is but one, and yet meeteth in three several places: by means whereof, the whole Church cannot come together in one; the ministers can not together with the flock sanctify the Lords day; the presence or absence of the members of the Church cannot certainly be known; nor any public action be rightly performed. Which reasons we signified to themselves in our dealing with them heretofore. On the other side, we misliked also that a few people, being strangers together in one town, of one language, of one profession in religion, & having not before time their peculiar officers, should in such case yet divide themselves into several Churches: For which I required example or warrant out of the Scriptures, and alleged myself diverse reasons about this question. And what contrariety now is there in these things, being laid together as they ought, with their true and due circumstances? Such perhaps as the false teachers would pretend against Paul, when he circumcised Timothee, Act. 16.1.3. and yet would not circumcise Titus, but withstood the false brethren that urged it, Gal. 2.3.4.5.  
The others he speaketh of, were himself and some other with him, who had left the Church of England, and came to dwell here. Touching whom, seeing he pretendeth that they joined not to us for diverse disorders amongst us, I will here advertise the Reader a few things concerning them, and those also specially out of their own letters, which being as their own children shall also be their judges. When they had left the Church of England, as having a● Antichristian Ministry, worship, confusion, etc. they first joined in & to a Church in the West parts of England professing the same faith with us. A while after, they came over hither, & at first communicated with us: but afterward (being about twelve or thirteen) they joined themselves here as a body together, to walk in the same faith and way as we do; reputing and calling themselves a Church, distinct from us, and in their letters to the Church of the West country thus inscribed them, The Church in Amst. to our brethren the Church in the West, partakers of the same heavenly vocation, etc. And in the letter wrote thus, For our consultation & resolution thus it is, To meet apart by ourselves, aswell for the redress of disorders that may arise, as also for the administration of the word, expecting the blessing of God which hath not chosen us for our multitude, seeing we were the fewest of all others. And again in the same letter, for our own estate, though our hope to be a body distinct in our country were, yet is not our hope to be a distinct body in a strange country frustrated, but rather accomplished. And afterward again speaking of us, and themselves, they say, For the other Church's estate, though that acknowledgement of them were granted, yet all things considered, whether God doth not offer us occasion to increase the number of the Churches, and ourselves to walk together in holiness to the Lord, who have had better experience one of another then of that Church's estate, that by this means the adversaries reproaches, of one Church, and flocking thereunto, setting up one head, may be stopped, is the thing we pray you to ponder. Thus they wrote in a general letter together.  
And in another of theirs written in particular by this T. White & Tho. Pow. We (say they) through God's mercy have our meetings now apart from our brethren the Church in Amsterdam, building up ourselves with that small ability that God hath inabed us withal &c. as also receiving such members as we find meet and desirous of our fellowship. And afterward in the same letter, W● have had one meeting already together, wherein M. W. is joined. Consider that which is written, Exo. 7. ●. and pray with us that the Lord would s●nd the northwind and the Southwind, the one cold the other hot, Luk: 12.55. that is, the lively graces of his spirit in the preaching of his Law and Gospel, to blow up that our garden may be fruitful, Cant. 4.16. but not an Eastwynd which withered jonas gourd, jon 4. Thus wrote they then of themselves. By which may appear, both what they intended, and for what. They intended to be a several Church from us, though they were but a few, and of the same faith, living strangers together, in the same town, etc. And the cause why they did it, That they might redress disorders among themselves; that they might be a distinct body in a strange country, as they purposed in our native country, before they came over hither; that they might increase the number of Churches; that they might stop the adversaries reproaches, of one Church, and flocking thereunto, setting up one head; that they might receive such members as were desirous of their fellowship; and that they might also themselves be a garden, fruitful, etc.  
If these things were so as then they wrote, how saith he now in his book, that the cause why they would not join to us, was for disorders amongst us? How do his letters and his Libel agree together? Specially seeing in the same letters, at the same time, they write us to be their brethren the Church in Amsterdam; of whose estate they had not that experience etc. Belike he had forgotten the old saying, Mendacem oportet esse memorem, A liar had need have a good memory. And further, if it were as he saith now, why did they not then so allege, that we might have insisted thereupon? why shrank they from the handling of the question between us, which we would have discussed by the Scriptures, had not they refused as they did? But (if some be not mistaken) there was an other cause then any of the aforesaid, which they will not make known, namely, that Mr Po. & this White might have been Officers of that Church, whereof they had little hope among us to satisfy their desire: Which whether it were so or not, themselves know best. And howsoever, yet with what face can this hypocrite write as he doth, that they would not join to us for diverse disorders among us, when but even a while after, they returned to the Church of England, which they knew certainly to have not only diverse disorders, but even a multitude of the corruptions of Antichrist the son of perdition.  
Well might he write of these things, as he did in another letter of his to Mr S. W. Respice finem, Look to the end. For as they sowed, so have they reaped▪ not having the wind of God's grace to blow upon them that they might be a fruitful garden, but the worm of God's judgement to smite them that they might become a withered gourd. And this according to his own prophecy (though as Caiaphas speaking more truth than himself intended) when to the same Mr S. W. he wrote thus also, Certainly if God doth not work mightily for us we shall come to desolation. Balaam even then when he would have cursed Israel, prophesied the truth, though against his will.  
5. The fifth is a mere calumniation, like the rest. In the place quoted, we blame in the Dutch (as we do also in the French) Church of this town, that the rule and commandment of Christ, Mat. 18.15.16.17. they neither observe, nor suffer rightly to be observed among them. (If this man-pleaser could approve them herein, why doth he not?) For ourselves we do carefully observe it, & think all the Churches of Christ are bound so to do. For deciding of matters which are of public nature, they are made known and decided among us in & by the whole body of the Church, and not by the Elders alone. Yet therein we have this order, that all such matters be first signified to the Elders, to whom the oversight of the Church and affairs thereof appertaineth: by whom likewise they are proprounded advised & treated of also publicly, as the cases do require. Of which points we have spoken sufficient (at least till we be answered) in our Apology against the Oxf. Doct. pag. 63.64. Notwithstanding if any come to the Elders, either for our advice or to have some matters brought to the Church, we show them what we think to be best as we are persuaded ourselves: & yet debar not any from proceeding further, so as they will answer their doing to the Church, as there the case shallbe found to be. And this to be our practice and manner of walking, I think this man himself knoweth well.  
For T. C. his matter, the Elders did not decide it (as he falsely saith) but showed him what we ourselves thought to be best according to godliness, and required of him to do no otherwise in it, than he could answer to God and to the Church. Of the matter itself, as also of W. H. is spoken here before, pag. 33. And for that he saith here, seeing W.H. his wife put him away, who can constrain her or any other in like case to retain such if themselves be not willing.  
For the bringing of matters in a third place to the Elders, as they have objected: Mr P. himself & the rest of them have been answered, that we do not so: but that when in the third place a matter is to come unto the Church by that rule of Mat. 18. this is the order we keep therein, that first knowledge thereof be given to the Elders, the overseers of the Church, then that they seeing the matter to be such and so dealt in as is to come to the Church, it be by them publicly propounded and prosecuted as is meet: whereas otherwise both the Church might be troubled and men's names and private matters be brought in public without just cause. And this we do, not adding to that rule of Christ (as this man and his followers have still objected) but having that care and keeping that order in the observation thereof, as the Scriptures else where lead us unto. For which, see 1 Tim. 5.17.18.19.21.22. & 4.14. Heb. 13.17. Rom. 12.7.8.1. Thes. 5.12.13.14.27. Rev. 2.1.7.8.11.12.18.29 & 3.1.6.7.13.14.22. with Exod. 3.16. & 4.29.30.31. & 12.21. and with 1 Cor. 14.40.  
By which also may appear how frivolous it is, that he saith we allege the same reasons for our practice, which we approve no● in ●he Dutch. As if we should put no difference between the Eldership alone hearing and deciding the public matters of the Church, & between the Elders according to their office having knowledge advising and propounding of such matters to be heard and discussed by the body of the Church jointly together; Or as if the reasons which warrant a lawful thing, should also bear out that which is unlawful; or that we should not therefore disallow them, when by any they are so applied?  
And for the abuse of that rule of Mat. 18. whether through evil affection in partiality and envy, or to an evil end to cover filthiness withal, if any do so as he saith (measuring others it may be by the length of his own foot) they are to answer it to God, who knoweth the heart and trieth the reins to give to every one according to their works. Our duty is, for that which man may see & judge, to have that rule as all other the ordinances of Christ carefully observed among us: Whereat let him consider if his heart grieve not more than it doth that the Church of England, of which he is, neither doth nor can in their estate observe that nor many other the ordinances of Christ: by reason whereof they cannot be esteemed a true Church of Christ in such constitution: As I showed before, pag. 8.  
6. For the sixth, which is about the worshipping of God in the Idol Temples of Antichrist, can he not put difference between the ordinary public worship of the Church in such places, and the occasional receiving of a●mes therein by the poor? Neither between the benevolence of a Church to the Ministers or Saints of Christ (which is ●he sacrifice spoken of Phil. 4.18) & the relief of a City given to the poor that dwell among them, be they of any religion whatsoever, one or other? Which I speak not, as discommending the care they have for the poor among them (which is very great, and much commendable) but to show the nature of this action, & how it is performed. Nor will he discern between the solemn appointed worship of God by the Church so assembled together, and the private duties of thankfulness, of salutation, or the like? Or doth he think we hold it not lawful to walk up and down in the Idol Temples, as they use in Paul's at London; or if we be walking there, to lift up our hearts to God as occasion may be; or if we meet some there of whom we have received a benefit, to give them thanks, Or if their Temples were made prisons (as in Paul's aforesaid there are diverse) and some of us committed thither (as heretofore sundry have been by the Prelates) that we would not pray there, yea & preach also as there might be occasion? Or when we did so, would he thereupon infer (as now he doth) that we condemn others in those things which we would and do ourselves? A senseless conclusion: but well beseeming a Baal's Priest, that hath a good will (if he had ability withal) to plead for Baal's altars and houses.  
As for the point itself, and the place of Deut. 12. we have written already in other Treatises not yet answered. 
apology. Discovery. Refutation. Questions. Answer to Mr H. etc.  Therefore need I not now write more about it here. But let the Reader observe here how this Idol Priest himself yieldeth these places to be Idol Temples, and the Temples of Antichrist: Yet bringeth no warrant for the reserving and appointing of them to spiritual use in the worship of God: but saith plainly, if the commandment Deut. 12. be moral (which he cannot deny, if he hold it moral for the Images and altars) that then no civil use of them may be had at all, much less spiritual. And yet I suppose he will not deny, but jehu the King of Israel put the house of Baal to a lawful use, 2 King. 10.27.  
7. The seventh is, that whereas we showed the Dutch here, that they use a new censure of Suspension, which Christ hath not appointed: yet we ourselves suspended M. S. many months together before his excommunication: But this he should have proved so to have been. The Dutch suspend their members from the Lords supper, and yet admit them to participation of the word and prayer. so did not we. But the case was thus: The said Mat. Sl. having declined from the truth which before he professed with us to sundry errors of the Dutch here, it required many days to deal with him and convince him in them all, which we were careful to do. Now when some of them being handled, he was admonished by the Church to repent and return to the truth, and he notwithstanding obstinately persisted against the voice of Christ so speaking unto him, there were some of us who thought it not lawful to have any more spiritual communion with him when he came to our public meetings. Whereabout there b●ing some question, and all the particulars being not yet finished, it was agreed for the present, when he did so come, to deal with him about the residue of the points yet remaining. Which being done, and diverse days (week after week) being so employed for the convincing of him in all: the Church did then excommunicate him, as here is said, and so he remaineth at this day: a man overcome with the love of this world (here called his preferment) and never a whit too good, when he was at the best, to be of our fellowship, which is in the Gospel of jesus Christ. For which, he that thinketh any too good, is himself stark nought.  
8. For the eight, about non residency, howsoever he speak of Mr Br. his absence fr●m the Church, and this without any leave thereof, yet himself knoweth that he with some others of us was upon special occasion sent by the Church into England, and there employed a long time about that business: Wherein also what good pains he took & with what great carefulness, even this White himself was often a present beholder & witness. When he stayed there, upon other occasion, he saith it was not so long as here is deceitfully pretended, (though longer than he or we would have had it) and that he could not then possibly do otherwise, as things fell out. But I will not here insist to speak, what may be done in cases of necessity or special occasion; or to put difference between factors, servants, and men agreeing together on mutual conditions; nor upon the difference that is between Ministers of the word and the Deacons; and specially the difference between one man having two three or four benefices (as they call them) by reason whereof, though he be still with some of those Churches, yet must he needs be a non resident all his life, and between one Church having two three or more Deacons, by means whereof though some be absent upon occasion, yet there are other usually present to perform the duties appertaining to the office notwithstanding. But of these things I will not stand. For that which we desire and approve is, that he which hath an office should wait on his office, Rom. 12.7.8.  
9 Now followeth the last of his instances, but not the least for the lies and slanders contained therein. The first particular here spoken of is about this, that we blamed in the Dutch Church of this town, that they receive unrepentant excommunicants, to be members of their Church: which by this means becometh one body with such as be delivered unto Satan. But this man had no list to set it down in our own words, because he hath no love to speak of things as the truth is. And if there were no other corruption but this only in the Church aforesaid, let such as are of judgement consider whether we have not just cause to put difference between it, & the other Churches of these countries that stand not in like transgression: (of which we spoke before, pag. 25.) and whether we which know these things and have had dealing with them thereabout, may suffer the members of our Church to join with them in this estate, in any part of their worship and Ministration, be it the preaching of the word, or any other whatsoever. Yet notwithstanding it is false that he saith we excommunicated our own members only for hearing the word preached amongst the Dutch or French: for those whom yet we have cast out hereabout, it hath been partly for their revolting from the truth which they have professed with us, to the corruptions of these Churches (which declining as they may show in hearing the word preached among them in such estate, 
1 Cor. 10.18.  so are we accordingly to esteem thereof) and partly for other sins withal, whereinto they have fallen. And a most shamelessly it is, that he saith we are ourselves one body with an excommunicate from the French Church. The party whom he intendeth (now one of the Elders of our Church) was not excommunicated by them, but did himself leave them for their corruptions, after he had long & much dealt with them in all good manner to the uttermost of his power thereabout, & they persisted therein notwithstanding.  
The next particular here spoken of, is about our dislike of them for that they observe days and times, consecrating certain days in the year to the Nativity, Resurrection, Ascension of Christ etc. Which this adversary himself knoweth we do not: though his conscience be so seared as he careth not how he belly us and abuse the Reader, so he may seem to say something against us. And strange it is (if he were not impudent out of measure) that he is not ashamed to say that we observe their holy days as much as they do. A thing which is false, in both the instances which himself giveth hereabout: the one being about the shutting of shops, the other about our public meetings for worship, on those days. For touching the first, such of us as shut their shops, do it not in respect of religion or with observance of public worship as they do, but partly thinking it to be a thing civil which may be done at the Magistrates appointment, seeing no spiritual observation is urged upon us withal, partly choosing rather so to do then to pay the penalty whereto otherwise they are liable, it being far more than in compass of the day they could by their labour obtain. Others of us do on those days follow their ordinary labour, & some have been called and have answered it before the Magistrates, alleging diverse reasons of their doing, in regard of Gods requiring but one day in seven for public worship, and permitting six for labour, & because of the popish and superstitious observance of these times still retained, and other the like. And what though in these things, being matters of such nature and question, we have differed in judgement? 
Act. 15. Rom. 14. Phil. 3.16.  Is it any other thing then the Christians in the Primitive Churches, & at this day, & in all ages have been & may be in diverse cases subject unto? For the second, it is a notable deceitful untruth, that we have our meetings for worship on their holy days: For although their Easter and Whitsunday falling always on the Lord's day, & the feast of Ascension of the fifth day on the week called Ascension Thursday, we have our public meetings on those days, yet it is not at all in respect of their holy days, but because that weekly we have our meetings on those days all the year thorough. Besides, if we observed their holy days as much as they do, we should have a religious regard of them & have our public meetings for worship as they have, on Christmas day & the morrow after, also on the morrow after Easter and Whitsunday. Which days together with the former he knoweth they observe, and we not. Yet shameth he not thus to write as he doth: as if his Lords the Prelates had given him a dispensation to lie and calumniate, no matter how, and that now he is grown so wicked and shameless that he counteth it nothing so to do, if thereby he may please his Lords or pleasure himself: God thus justly punishing his former hypocrisy and present apostasy: & so matching his writing with his walking, as it should be an evident testimony in the sight of all how undeniably his own collections are true in himself, as in his Lords too, which so injuriously he would apply unto us; and how far he is behind the very heathen, even Medea herself which said, Video meliora proboque, Deteriora sequor, I see better things & approve them, but I follow the worse: whereas himself, after the example of his patrons, though he see better things, yet doth not so much as approve them, but set himself to oppugn them what he can possibly; and for the worse things, doth not only follow them, but approve and applaud them most shamefully: yea and thereunto bringeth pretended allegation of Scripture, as if it were no sin to take the Name of God in vain, and make the Scriptures serve his own fancy, yea his lies & calumnies. For which certainly the Lord will not hold him guiltless.  
And where he pretendeth against us as if he could declare false and impertinent allegation of Scripture, and yet passeth by it undeclared: the Reader observing his purpose and dealing may easily gather, that if he thought himself able to do it, he wanteth no will thereunto. That which he referreth unto in a book already published, will not prove it so much as in part; 
A Discourse of certain troubles & excom. etc.  no though himself with all his aiders do join withal. The point is about the Scriptures alleged by us against the yearly change of the Elders in this Dutch Church, and not continuing in their office according to the doctrine of the Apostles and practice of the Primitive Churches: Which Scriptures be these, Rom. 12.4.5.6.7.8. 1 Cor. 12.11.12. etc. Act. 20.17.28. 1 Pet. 5.1.2.3.4. and Numb. 8.24. etc. Where there be many reasons expressed and included, plainly disproving the yearly change and dismission aforesaid: As namely, the authority and work of the Lord making them Overseers of his Church, and placing them as members in his body; the duties of waiting on their office, of feeding the flock committed unto them, of attendance, care, and watchfulness therein; the account to be given thereof unto the Lord; and the reward to be hoped for from him according to his promise at that day; and other the like. Neither can any example, or reason of sound consequence, be showed from the Scriptures for warrant of their practice. But I need not speak further of this point, unless some would undertake their defence against us in the particulars wherein we have had to deal with them. Which neither themselves could perform, nor any other would yet so much as attempt for them, though some great learned men have had just occasion thereunto, if they could have done it.  
As for that he saith of the book aforesaid lying unanswered, we have diverse reasons for so leaving it. 1. It is but part of a book, printed before the rest was finished: And to see the whole, might be of special use if an answer should be given unto it. 2. Since the writing thereof, it pleased God to visit him with sickness that he died: And seeing he is dead, we do so leave him: forbearing now to write what we could: a● is well known to many. 3. He did not, like as this man, leave or contrary our general cause and testimony against the Church of England: but held it so himself, as of late going into England he was there taken and put in prison for this cause, where he died under their hands. These reasons among other we have of not answering it: Being notwithstanding alway ready (as there is just and needful occasion) to answer for ourselves, & to defend the truth and equity of our cause & dealing, or wherein we have erred to acknowledge and amend it, as we have often signified heretofore.  
Now for that wherewith he concludeth, even false accusations of whole Churches, & would show it by comparing the 7. accusation in our letters to Mr junius, 
Confess. with Mr jun. letters. Pag. 54.  with the practice of the Dutch Churches: it is to be observed, that the particular corruptions there noted whereof we have advertised the Eldership of this Dutch Church, be ele●en in all: so as this enemy granteth himself ten of them to be true: And for the other, that one whereof he speaketh, namely their yearly change of Elders, it also is so true, as the Ministers themselves deputed among them to deal with us, & knowing best their own estate & practice, did never so much as once offer to deny it; and their continual practice (if they have not left it of late) avowcheth it against all gaynsayers. Yet this flatterer (to speak somewhat for them) shameth not to say that is false which is very true: like as here before against us he affirmed those things to be true which are very false. A fit servant for his Lords the Prelates, with whom it is common in all their dealing against us, to account & give out of the truth that it is falsehood, and again of falsehood that it is truth: That in himself and his Masters may be seen verified that saying of Plautus here alleged, justum non justum, non justum justum, quod vobis placet. Let them therefore consider their ways in their heart, and lay their hands on their mouth: Else let them know that out of their own mouth they shallbe judged, according to those denunciations & reproofs here spoken of, both by the Apostle, Rom. 2.1— 9 and by the Prophet, Psal. 50.16— 22. and by Christ himself, Mat. 7.1— 5. Luk. 19.22. Which I leave this hypocrite with his fellows to ponder and apply to themselves: and will now conclude this third head of his Treatise, and our answer to his false accusations, with that saying of Apuleius, Insimulari quivis innocens a quovis nebulone potest: Or rather with that answer of Nehemiah, 

Nehem. 6.8.  
Prov. 24.28.   It is not done according to these words that thou sayest: but thou feynest them of thine own heart. And with that of Solomon in his Proverbes, Be not a witness against thy neighbour without cause: for wilt thou deceive with thy lips? And hitherto concerning the third head of his Treatise.   

Of the fourth head of Th: White his Treatise.  
THe fourth and last is, that he saith we have drawn the curse of God on ourselves by rash unjust & wicked excommunication. Where first in general observe these things. 1. That we have the power and use of excommunication: without which no Church can walk aright in obedience of the faith of Christ▪ nor long continue without manifold errors and corruptions prevailing among them. 2. That even by this appeareth we hold that evil men may creep into and arise in the Church. 3. And that when they are once known and will not be reclaimed from their evil, we approve them not, but cast them out from among us. And so this fourth point being well observed, overthroweth the whole tenor and intendment of all his writing against us. Now to come to the particulars.  
1. About thirteen years since, this Church through persecution in England, was driven to come into these countries. A while after they were come hither, diverse of them fell into the heresies of the Anabaptists (which are too common in these countries) and so persisting were excommunicated by the rest. Then a while after that again, many others (of whom specially I think he speaketh he●●) some elder some younger, even too many, though not the ha● (as I understand) fell into a schism from the rest, and so many of them as continued therein were cast out: diverse other of them repenting and returning before excommunication, & diverse of them after. As for him in particular of whom he speaketh that he was distracted in mind, 1. He was not then so known to be, neither so reputed of his fellows, but only that he had some trouble of conscience which disquieted him. 2. Yet sithence it hath been pleaded by some that he was distracted, whereupon to himself it hath been offered by the Church, that if he would come & affirm as much publicly in the Church as he and others had said more privately to some of us thereabout, and that the contrary could not by any be showed against him, than the Church would acknowledge that they offended in casting him out, and he should be received again. But this he would never yet do: although it have been signified to him again and again by myself and others, that thus the Church had agreed concerning him. And thus standeth his case.  
For the excommunication in general, it was in deed recalled: wheerupon C.S. one of the schismed here mentioned by him, wrote unto me thereabout. (And here the Reader is to know that myself with some others of us, both of the officers and other brethren, were then prisoners at London, while these things fell out in the Church being in the Low countries.) Now in his letter he wrote, that the brethren had revoked it as rash and unjust, denying also that he and the rest with him had made the separation etc. With this letter I acquainted the other also then in prison: & we thought it best (considering the case as we had before been informed and took it to be) to send his letter to the brethren aforesaid, that they might see how he had written thereof, & we might know the truth of things how they stood. Whereupon the matter being again and further examined both by them & by us (as in such estate and distance of place we could do) it was in the end agreed upon by the Church, that the excommunication was just and not to be recalled, notwithstanding the errors in the manner of proceeding thereabout: which the Church then did and alway is ready to acknowledge, and whereupon they had before revoked it 〈◊〉 unjust, only in respect of that circumstance, but not at all clearing the schismed of their transgression they stood in▪ which at that time the schismed themselves agreed unto, confessing the cause they stood for, to be evil.  
And now both for their good whom this matter more specially concerneth, as also for the satisfying of others, and that Th. White his abusing of us may better appear, I will here briefly note down the grounds whereupon the excommunication was esteemed just & not to be recalled: as I find in some writings reserved about this matter: Which was thus. 1. The excommunicated were found to be abettors of an evil cause, and thereupon to have made the schism at the first: and so were guilty of the sin for which they were proceeded against. And this was then agreed on all hands, as we were let to understand. 2. They also were afterward diverse times and ways reproved & admonished thereof; They had sight of the witnesses testimonies about the matter then in question; they heard the reasons gathered by one of the brethren for their conviction; the Church sent unto them of the best able of the brethren to deal with them, besides that we wrote from London concerning this matter, exhorting them to peace etc. And all this before the last message of the Church unto them, which was that they should ●●me to the Church, & there they should be convicted, or if they came not they should be cast out. 3. They yet remained impenitent and despised the Church's voice and authority. Which appeared by their answer to the Church's message aforesaid, being to this effect, That as by commandment or as unto the Church they would not come at any time: And, that whereas some of them were to go out of the town on the morrow, and all of them were at that time unprovided to maintain their cause, if they might have a hand with them in appointing another day, they would come to confer with them and maintain that they did. In which answer be diverse things showing their impenitency and despising the Church's authority. 1. Their answering resolutely, that by commandment or as unto the Church they would not come at any time. 2. That they would have an hand in appointing the day when they would come. Which might have greatly infringed the liberty & power of the Church, to yield unto schismatics an equal authority in such cases. 3. That their coming should be to confer and maintain their cause, not to show repentance. Besides that some of them also despitefully asked the brethren, when they would draw out their wooden dagger, etc. Now whereas it hath been objected, that they refused not simply to come, that charity would have taken things in the best part, that the Church might have appointed them another day etc. it was also granted that these and all such things should have been duly weighed afore the censure had been executed, and that whatsoever error was committed therein is alway to be acknowledged: yet for the reasons before alleged, the censure was deemed to be just and not to be recalled.  
And for those he speaketh of that withstood their receiving in again, even this showeth that there were then among themselves which thought the excommunication was not to be revoked. Yet were not they therefore excommunicated, as he saith: but were earnestly exhorted to rest in their difference of judgement, and notwithstanding it peaceably to continue with the Church, if it were but till they could use the advice and help of others for the better clearing of this conttroversy which had so long & much troubled them. Yet they would not, but left of all communion with the Church: and so persisting, were for this cause excommunicated: Who also afterward upon acknowledgement of their error therein were received again.  
Finally for the reversing again of the censure aforesaid, who knoweth not that even the best and wisest men have their second & 〈◊〉 thoughts: and that in some cases this befell the Prophets & Apostles themselves: howsoever here he term it a dallying: esteeming others belike by himself who hath so changed and rechaunged his faith and profession as if he thought he might dally with religion at his pleasure. But the Lord is not mocked: As he hath sowed to the flesh, so let him look of the flesh to reap corruption. For as every man soweth, so shall he reap. Gal. 6.7.8.  
2. Of the second instance, which is about such as have heard the word preached in the Dutch Church, I have spoken before. If he had named the diverse he speaketh of, it might have been showed that they were cast out for diverse causes. As M. Sl. whom only he nameth in particular was, for receiving and maintaining these errors, 1. The baptizing of the seed of such as are no members of any visible Church of Christ, neither can be themselves received to the Lords supper in any such Church. 2. Read prayer, or a set form of prayers prescribed by men for th● worship of God: As also, maintaining that that only is not to be used in the worship of God, which God himself hath commanded. These are other things then only hearing the word preached, as this Proctor for excommunicates objecteth again and again in his Libel. And both the Teacher and myself told him aforehand what would follow, if he joined with the Dutch in these corruptions aforesaid. Which M. Sl. himself knoweth to be true. As he doth also that the other matter here intimated, was about their Temples (whither he was to bring the scholars to the public worship): concerning which there being then some diversity of judgement, and himself affirming that he had always held it lawful to hear in those places, & so had 
‡ In these countries, being from the Church upon occasion.  before practised, after he was come to this cause, I said (as I remember) that it should not trouble myself, & for others I would therein persuade them the best I could: 
† But afterward I did speak more to him here about, as he may remember.  But whereas we heard that the Dutch baptised all that were brought unto them, & used also read prayer in their worship, I told him also that if these things being so he should partake with them therein, that then his case would prove such as we could not keep communion together. Yet he went on, & persisted, and so for his receiving and maintaining of these corruptions among them, about baptism and read prayer, he was cast out of the Church. By which also, this man's dealing and depraving a●ter his manner, may here be observed.  
And for the general, of excommunicating such as being of us have declined to the corruptions of these Churches, the Law of God requireth that all sin and sinners be censured without respect of persons. And who ever would have blamed 
‡ Smyrn● Philadelphia etc.  such of the Primitive Churches as were free from the errors found in 
† Corinth. Galat. Pergamu● etc.  others of them at the same time, about the resurrection from the dead, fornication spiritual and bodily, justification by works of the Law etc. if any of their members declining thereunto they should have excommunicated them for this cause. If the particulars noted in this Dutch Church be not errors & corruptions, why is not that point undertaken to be cleared? If they be such, why should we not for them accordingly censure our members declining thereunto?  
3. Of the third, which is about the question of Apostasy, (often spoken of by him who is so notable an Apostate himself) I have spoken somewhat before, Pag. 34. Now further the Reader is to know, that while myself with some other of us were prisoners in England, there fell out question about this matter among the brethren here in these countries. Whereof knowledge being given unto us from hence, we wrote a letter unto them, setting down what our judgement then was about this point, & the reasons persuading us thereunto. And this is that whereof he speaketh here: which we wrote to the Church being absent from it. Whereabout some of the brethren from hence wrote unto us a while after, how they were contrary minded, and their reasons thereof. Afterward it pleased God so to dispose as we were discharged out of prison, and came over hither. Being here, there was speech and question again about this matter: And some of us did now consider further about it, more being observed out of the Scriptures about this point, then at the first had been. And so began the alteration of our judgement to be such as it is. Which was a good while before ever we heard any thing concerning Mr A. So very false it is which here he writeth thereabout.  
And for those that were cast out, these things are to be observed: 1. Both the point in general, and the case in particular was considered. For the general, these questions were spoken of, 

And these were in deed the causes that made us think more and otherwise of this matter, than we had done.  
Which we also showed in the Church.   whether the Priests being special types of Christ, the exception out of Ezech. 44. where they are spoken of, do yet include all persons, times, offices, and conditions, etc. Also, whether even in the time of the Law, the Levites (which were not of the Priests) falling to Idolatry, and afterward repenting, might not again have and execute the same office & function as they had before: And in the New Testament, whether john Mark at first refused by Paul for his apostasy, Act. 15.37.38. was not afterward received by the same Apostle and employed in the ministery of the Gospel notwithstanding, Col. 4.10.11. etc. For the particular, it was also considered, what the exception was about (which is spoken of before, Pag. 42.) that themselves could not deny but he was a man very fit for the office in all other respects; that he was already in office, and the thing before this time not known to the Church concerning him; (although if it had been known, consideration were to be had of the nature of the thing done, of the condition of the person, of the estate of the Church, and other the like circumstances to be observed thereabout) that both before and after his being in office he had well approved himself to and with the Church, to the great help & comfort of us all, etc. 2. Yet notwithstanding they persisted and left of to participate with the Church in all his ministration therein. 3. We entreated them that they would not so walk, but to continue with us as before, at least till we might either among ourselves or by others have further help and dealing about this matter: but they would not. Whereupon they were for this leaving of communion with the Church, together with other causes which he noteth not, cast out: and some of them a good while since upon their repentance received in again.  
For that which he saith of not answering the reasons in writing, note these things: 1. We were absent from the Church, when we wrote the reasons aforesaid in a letter sent hither: but now were here present with the Church to speak mouth to mouth with any that did or should make question thereabout. 2. We also signified, that if it were so that we were absent, having like occasion as before, we would then write as before we had done: but being now present to speak and reason together, we thought it best so to do. Not to speak any thing now of the persons and their dealing that would have it otherwise. 3. Yet when the matter was still urged, we further advised & agreed about it, of some particular circumstances or cautions to be observed therein: Which were set down in writing, and given to the ruling Elders, for any that would come to read or reason thereabout: And upon occasion we gave the same also in writing to the Eldership of the Dutch Church here. These things T. White himself knoweth, and heretofore thought it sufficient to satisfy any that were reasonable: howsoever now he write thereof.  
And where he saith we would not suffer the reasons to be read in our. meeting, being requested there unto: sometimes in deed we did not suffer it, wishing the parties that were contrary minded unto us to show their reasons out of the word of God (whether they were those contained in that writing or any other) and so to reason from that ground, which is the only rule of our faith: sometimes also for the more satisfying of all, they were both read and reasoned of in our public meeting.  
As for playing Satan's part, let him apply it to himself, who hath heretofore both by word and writing out of the Scriptures approved our cause against the Antichristian estate of the Church of England, and having now left and oppugning it, yet hath not, (nor ever can) use as good means to disprove it, and to approve the estate of that Church whither he is returned: With whom also it is so common throughout his book, to object against us things very false, & to conceal or deprave the things he knoweth to be good: and all this to calumniate the truth and us that wi●nesse it before the world.  
For that which he annexeth of Mr Ad. such as were here present, do neither remember it, nor think it to be true: howsoever he affirm it: And if it had so been, yet who knoweth not that alteration of practice doth usually follow alteration of judgement? And if in other cases, why not in this also?  
Finally we do here know but in part: & are subject to err both in our judgement and in our walking: as I deny not but in these things thus much urged upon us we may have done. Yet our desire hath been and I trust shallbe alway to try all things by the word of God, and to keep that which is good.  
4. The fourth instance is of W.A. cast out for recalling a former Schism, spoken of a little before in his first instance. Whatsoever W.A. now say, the Church heard and see what then he spoke & did. If he do still repent of that Schism, standing to the acknowledgement he made, that matter is soon ended. To the writing of Th. White and others about this matter, this answer was given by the Elders (which the messengers can testify) that it being about excommunication, it was a matter which concerned the whole body of the Church, and therefore if they had any thing to say thereabout, they should come to the Church at our public meeting, and there they should have an answer. But thither came they not. So themselves kept back an answer from themselves. And still Th. White keepeth on his course to write falsely. What the schism here spoken of was & whereabout, see before, pag. 65.  
As for appealing, seeing it is from an inferior judge to a superior, we hold it Antichristian to entertain or admit of such appeals from one Church to another, because Christ the Lord hath given like & equal power & authority to all his Churches on the earth. Yet notwithstanding may and aught one Church to help another, by any good means they can, as there is occasion. But what is this to the appealing and trial whereof he speaketh, when such as be excommunicated by this Church, would have their matters and the like submitted to the Dutch and French Churches here, or any other else where? For which themselves could not by the word of God show any warrant: And against which we had & have these reasons following. 1. That the judge which God hath ordained in these cases, is to be submitted unto, and not to any other, Deut. 17.8.9.10.11.12. 2. That the highest judge ordained now of the Lord for all sinners by Ecclesiastical censure, is the Church, even that particular Church whereof the sinner is a member, Mat. 18.17. with 1 Cor. 5.4.5.12.13. 3. That all Churches of Christ have equal power, and are not one over another, but have Christ himself over all, and in midst of all, Rev. 1.13. & 2.1. And therefore in urging our Church to submit to another Church, they sought to draw it into Antichristian bondage, which we might by no means yield unto, Gal. 5.1. Rev. 14.9.12. 4. The sin and sinner being bound in heaven▪ how may the cause be submitted to men on earth? Mat. 18.18. 5. If the censures of the Church, than also other doctrines of the Gospel & our faith in Christ, might aswell by the same ground be brought to like submission. 6. It is contrary also to the Confession of our faith published, Artic. 24.25. 7. And this way there would be no end of strife: for if the two Churches disagreed, a third & higher must be sought unto by like reason; and if yet they agreed not, an higher than that: and thus might the usurped Supremacy of the Romish Church and Pope grow and be established. 8. Finally if we might & would assent, yet these Dutch & French Churches do not hear any such matters; but they are heard and handled only by the Eldership (by them erroneously put in place of the whol● Church) as we have had experience upon other occasions.  
Now though we might not (for these and like reasons) submit as they required, yet we also signified that if these Churches or Ministers, or any else whosoever, could show us by the word of God to have faulted in any thing, we were willing and ready to hear them. These are our reasons and this is our refusal and walking in such cases. Which this White knoweth full well, and therefore his sin is the greater, to write and deal notwithstanding as he doth.  
5. The fifth instance, which is about receiving the penitent offenders in cases of adultery, is spoken of before, pag. 32.33. To which I refer the Reader: & will now only ask of him, whether he would have any to retain unrepentant adulterers and adulteresses, and so to partake in their sin? It may be some of his Lords the Prelates can quickly take him out as bad lessons as this: specially he being so apt a scholar for such Masters. Yet may not we retain such members in our Church. And if we should, what exclamations would he make against us, as in deed justly he might? Here therefore mark the wickedness of this Imp of Satan, common to him with such enemies of the truth and Church. If any stand from and against the Church, be they never so lewd & wicked, he is ready to favour & partake with them. But if any continue with the Church, though they repent of their sins as David, he will not cease to malign and abuse them, yea & to defame the whole Church thereby, as if it were a company of adulterers etc. as before in his book hath appeared.  
6. The sixth instance is of his own wife, Rose White, excommunicated for two things, though he mention but one: 1. First for not bringing her child to baptism; 2. For falling from the truth which she had professed with us, to the corruptions of the Dutch Church here where she joined herself a member. And the man he speaketh of, her husband, is himself, matches one for another.  
For the abuses which he speaketh of, to give an instance, was not one of them our observing of that rule Mat. 18.15.16.17. in such manner as we do? For which when he had reproved the Church, and was after a weeks respi●e called upon for his proof, he was glad openly in the Church to say he was unprovided: and came no more to our meetings to prove it at any time afterward. Yet such is his face as he will boast of his reproving abuses amongst us.  
touching his wives alleging of the example of Timothees mother that did not circumcise him, and no other cause mentioned but that his ●ather was a Grecian, he saith she could get no answer; whereas the whole congregation then present knoweth how many things were answered about it, & sundry reasons used about this case of not bringing her child to Baptism, upon her husbands forbidding: As,  
That the covenant of grace made with the Church in Christ, was without respect of persons or sex, there being in him neither male nor female, Gal. 3.28. and therefore though the father should refuse or neglect, the mother hath right and aught to present.  
That she might not deprive her seed of the sacrament of Baptism upon her husband's will, any more than herself of the Lords supper if he should forbid her, because that by the believing woman the children are clean, as well as by the believing man. 1 Cor. 7. ●4. & she now being of our church & her husband not, we were to call upon her for performance of her duty.  
That baptism was a sign of incorporating into Christ, and salvation by his death and resurrection, so as her neglect of baptizing her child could not but be injurious both to Christ and it.  
When these & the like persuasions were used unto her, and she had nothing to answer but asked why then Timothees mother did not circumcise her child, our Teacher (as he remembreth) answered that the cause was not certainly known, for it was not expressed in the scripture: If she were living and present we would demand of herself, but she is now dead and gone, wherefore it were hard for us to determine of the cause, but this Ro. White was living and present & must give account of her own ways: That we must not walk by example but by law of God: for even the most righteous may offend, & Moses himself faulted in neglecting the circumcising of his son. Exod 4. And if Timothees mother being a Jewess did marry with a Gentile an infidel, who therefore would not suffer her to circumcise her son, & she obeyed him; that such marriages were forbidden of God and unlawful: And then she sinning in marrying with him, why might she not also sin in keeping her child uncircumcised for him, if that were the cause as now this woman pretended? Wherefore she was put in mind rather of the examples of other good women, as Abigail, 1 Sam. 25. the elect Lady. 2 joh. Epist. also of some spoken of in the Maccabees (though that book be Apocrypha) which lost their lives for causing their children to be circumcised. 1 Mach. 1.63. 2 Mach. 6.10. It was also demanded by some of us, how it could be showed otherwise but that Timothe●s mother might be 
‡ 2 Tim. 1.5. and 3.14.15. and 1 Tim. 4.6.12. with Act. 16. & 17. & 18. & 19 & 20. chap.  in the faith of the Gospel before he was born and he in that respect might be uncircumcised▪ Also, whether the women in Noah's time should have refused to enter into the Ark, or the women of Israel in Moses time to go themselves with their childen through the red sea, if their husbands had been against it? Both which were types and resemblances of our baptism, as the Scripture showeth, 1 Cor. 10.1.2. 1 Pet. 3.20.21.  
These and the like reasons being then showed and spoken of, and now upon this occasion thus noted down, let the Reader here consider of this man's dealing and his wives, and accordingly esteem thereof as now he findeth it to be. His scoffing at the Teacher of our Church, not only for his words then used, but even at the office itself which he executeth (and therein at the 
† Ephe. 4.11. Rom. 12.7.  ordinance of Christ) hurteth not him nor us, but increaseth this scorners sin & judgement upon his own head.  
For that which he saith of myself, I did in deed with hold my consent touching the first cause of her excommunication about the child's baptizing: making some doubt about the case aforesaid, partly in respect of the husband's authority over his family, partly because of the objections arising about the case & Scriptures alleged out of Act. 16.3. etc. Yet notwithstanding I gave my consent as touching the second cause thereof, for her falling from the truth to their corruptions here: And that so, as I said also I was willing for it to pronounce the sentence myself, if the Church should so appoint. By which compared with his writing may appear, how still he keepeth on his wonted course against us, & hath himself drawn fourth this unfolding of his evil dealing and his wives too.  
For the others of whom he speaketh (viz, M Sl. Goodw. Ch. & R. M.) they were excommunicated for other causes than he hath noted down. And it is not our manner to cast out any for difference of judgement in such cases, if they be content notwithstanding to walk peaceably with the Church, and to carry themselves towards the excommunicates as they should by the word ●f God. But if they join with them in their evil, as some of these more specially did with his wife, then are they also for so doing justly subject to the ●ame censure with them, as in this case likewise came to pass.  
That which he speaketh of the Magistrate is false: he did not forbid, but persuaded us not to do it. Though if he had or should forbid us any thing which God requireth at our hands, we have learned to obey God rather than man: 
A●t. 5.29.  As we did then answer him, that what we did, we would always be ready to approve by the word of God. And now by that which hath been said, let the Reader judge whether this fellows hard forehead verify not the Orators saying, He that 〈◊〉 passeth the bounds of modesty, becometh impudent out of measure.  
Excommunication we use as the holy ordinance of God, to recover the parties that have sinned (if so it be his will) and to keep the Church from the leaven of their wickedness. If we did it not, we should dishonour God, and be accessary to their evil. But observing it, we use the remedy which Christ hath given us, for their good: and if it work not so in them, than is their destruction the more just upon their heads, and we are clear. Neither doth the long suffering spirit of meekness hinder but that due execution of the Lords judgement upon obstinate sinners be inflicted. And being so done, neither will this man's cursing us for good hurt us, not his blessing of himself & others in evil help them. Therefore to his many curses denounced against us, I will give no other answer, but say with Solomon, 
Prov. 26.2  The curse causeless shall not come, but fly away as a bird: and return upon him that allegation out of the Prophet, As he loved cursing, 
Psal. 109.17.18.  so shall it come unto him, and as he loved not blessing, so shall it ●e far from him: and as he clothed himself with cursing like a garment, so shall it come into his bowels like water, & like oil into his bones. And for his blessing of himself and others in evil, I will refer him to that denunciation of Moses against every such one, as when he heareth the words of the curse, yet blesseth himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace, although I walk according to the stubbornness of mine own heart, 〈◊〉 adding drunkenness to thirst: The Lord will not be merciful unto him, but then the wrath of the Lord and his jealousy shall smoke against that man, & every curse that is written in the book of the Law shall light upon him, and the Lord shall put out his name from under heaven, and the Lord shall separate him unto evil out of all the tribes of Israel, according unto all the curse● of the covenant, that 〈◊〉 written in the book of the Law. Deut. 29. ●9. 20.21.  
For that which he speaks of our Tents, it is to be noted that this man himself desiring heretofore to partake with us in the Lord's supper, did in our public meeting compare our and all true Churches to the Tents of Shem, & the assemblies of the Church of England (whither now he is returned) to the Tents of Corah, Dathan, & Abiram. What remaineth therefore but that according to the words of his own mouth and course of his own walking he be left to the Lord the jealous God that judged Corah & his company? 
Numb. 16.  Who also is the God of Shem, & will perform to the sons of japheth whom he persuadeth to dwell in Shems tents, according to his promise made of old to Abraham son of Shem, 
Gen. 9.29.27.  & Father of the faithful of all nations, saying, I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee. Gen. 12.3.  
For that which he annexeth about fatherless children, himself knoweth we approve no such dealing. And some of the persons to whom they were committed are departed this life. The living belike could not serve his turn: but he will dig into the graves of the dead. who cannot answer for themselves. Or if he mean of any that are alive, why gave he not (after his manner) some knowledge who they be? Would he not that the matter should have been considered and answer made accordingly? Or would he that we should speak what we hear concerning a fatherless child. who was long since with that woman who is now this Whites wife, and ran away from her: who knoweth best herself how she used her?  
For ourselves we mislike all hard and evil usage of any, much more savage and cruel dealing to fatherless children, who ought most of all to be pitied and holpen. If any such have more specially felt their part of our common troubles and poverty, why will he not consider his Lords the Prelates their savage and cruel dealing with us, who have made many poor orphans and widows among us, besides many other great calamities brought upon us by their means? Of which to begin to speak were to enter into an Ocean sea: so many and great they are▪ and not unknown to this White himself: howsoever he can like now to sail in that sea, where putting away a good conscience, he hath concerning the faith made shipwreck.  
For that which he saith of W.C. the man himself affirmeth that be spoke not these words at all which he hath printed of him: and that he told this Whites wife before the book was published, and spoke it since to his own face, that it is a lie. Some words he confesseth he spoke which were evil: but those also spoken by him about a year before he joined to the Church, as himself testifieth. Yet White objecteth his speech as the confession of our own members, affirming also what he hath printed to be spoken before many witnesses. Which if it were, yet till we should know it, & after knowledge & dealing with him find him obstinate in such evil, how could we but have him still a member among us? But if such speeches, yea or public writings, of the members of the Church of England would content men, as White will with this content himself, how easy were it for his one to to produce a thousand, and none of them perverted neither?  
The conclusion of his Libel, is like the rest. The censures of Christ in his Church, he blasphemously calleth our fond excommunications. which 
† Whites Discov. p. 24.  before in like manner he termed our Bulls of excommunications. surely God that will not hold him guiltless that taketh his Name in vain, will never suffer such profanation of his Name and ordinance to go in vain. Such de●iding and despising of the Lord and his ordinances is fearful. And a fearful thing it is to fall into the hands of the living God. All his Lords the Prelate's authority and authorizing of his book to be published (as himself alleged here before the Magistrates) will not help him before the Lord, 
Prov. 11.21.  who is a consuming fire. From whom what can he or any so persisting look for else, but to be cast out from his presence, and to have their portion among the cursed to hear that fearful sentence, Go ye cursed into everlasting fire, which is prepared for the Devil and his Angels. Mat. 25.41.  
And thus hath this Esau showed himself to be one of those profane, of whom he speaketh here, hardened in his sin and profaneness, and of which also he spoke in the Preface at the beginning of his book: That in him might be seen the truth of that which Solomon saith, 
Eccles. 10.12.13.  The lips of a fool devour himself: The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness, and the latter end of his mouth is wicked madness: & that thus also it might appear, how far he is from being of the Israel of God, that follow peace and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord. Heb. 12.14.  
touching his postscript about T. C. the man himself saith he is falsely traduced by him, as he was likewise accused by some other here to Magistrates for the same thing, who could not prove it against him, when the matter came to be examined. And see here still the bad dealing of this man, who publisheth his name in this manner to the world, only upon an hear-say, not knowing whether the thing were true or false, and then also when he heard withal that he had greatly bewailed his sin, and had not afterward given him any just or needful cause so to do. For the casting of him out, it was thought meet and good, considering his former dealing & the present case, so to proceed: yet not without difference of judgement in some of us thereabout. But he was shortly after received in again, being repentant for his sin. Now here let the Reader observe, how this man which blameth others for not forgiving of penitent sinners, hath not ceased throughout his book to publish and object the sins of such against the whole Church and the parties themselves: besides the manifold falsehoods and blasphemies into which also he is ●un. But his madness is become manifest to men, and his judgement sleepeth not with God: who will remember and reward him according to his works. Nehem. 6.14. 2 Tim. 4.14.    

A note of the particulars (spoken of before, pag. 62.) wherein we differ from the Dutch and French Churches of this city, & whereabout we have had dealing with such of their Ministers as by the rest of their Eldership were deputed thereunto.  
1. THat the estate of the Dutch Church of Amst. is such, as being one, yet it meeteth in three several places: whereby it cometh to pass that the whole Church cannot come together in one: the Ministers cannot together with the flock sanctify the Lords day: the presence of the members of the Church cannot certainly be known: and finally, no public action, whether excommunication or any other, can rightly be performed. Which is contrary to these Scriptures, 1 Cor. 12.27. & 11.20, 23. Math. 18, 17. with 1 Cor. 5, 4. Act. 6.2, 5. Numb. 8.9. Act. 20.28.  
2. They baptise the seed of them who are no members of any visible Church: of whom moreover they have not care as of members, neither admit their parents to the Lords Supper. Gen. 17.7, 9, 10, 11. 1 Cor. 7.14. Exod. 12.48. with 2 Chron. 30.6. etc. Numb. 9.13. Hos. 2.2.4. with Rev. 17.1. Ezech. 16.59. etc.  
3. In the public worship of God, they have devised & use an other form of prayer, besides that which Christ our Lord hath prescribed Mat. 6. reading out of a book certain prayers invented and imposed by man. Exod. 20.4.5. and 30.9. with Psal. 141.2. and Rev. 8.3. Lev. 10.1. Esa. 29.13. with Math. 15.9. Rom. 8.26. Eph. 4.8. 1 Pet. 2.5.  
4. That rule and commandment of Christ, Mat. 18.15.16.17. they neither observe nor suffer rightly to be observed among them.  
5. They worship God in the Idol-temples of Antichrist. Exod. 20.4. with Deut. 12.2.3. 2 18.11.12 etc.  
6 The Ministers have their set maintenance after an other manner than Christ hath ordained, 1 Cor. 9.14. And that also such, as by which any Ministry at all, whether popish or other whatsoever, might be maintained.  
7. Their Elders change yearly, and do not continue in their office according to the doctrine of the Apostles and practice of the primitive Churches. Rom. 12.4.5.6.7.8. 1 Cor. 12.11.12. etc. Act 20.17.28. 1 5.1.2. 3.4. See also Numb. 8.24. etc.  
8. They celebrate Marriage in the Church, as if it were a part of the Ecclesiastical administration, whereas it is in the nature of it merely civil. Ruth. 4. chap. Heb. 13.4. 1 Cor. 7.2.  
9 They use a new censure of Suspension, which Christ hath not appointed. Math. 28.20. Gal. 3.15. 2 Tim. 3.16.17.  
10. They observe days and times, consecrating certyan days in the year, to the Nativity, Resurrection, Ascension of Christ, etc. Exod. 20. Commandment, 2. & 4. Rev. 1.10. 1 Cor. 10.1. ●. Act. 20.7. Col. 2.16.17. Esa. 66.23. Gal. 4.10.11.  
11. They receive unrepentant excommunicates, to be members of their Church: which by this means becometh one body with such as be delivered unto Satan. 1 Cor. 5.5. 1 Tim. 1.20.  
About this matter we had dealing with them diverse times heretofore. And we desired that knowledge thereof might by themselves be given to the whole body of their Church, or that they would take order that it might be done by us. But they refused both. Whereabout we had afterward some further dealing with them. In which time, diverse messages and answers passed between us. Which we had thought here to have inserted: but now think good for the present to forbear them: Wishing rather that they might be buried among themselves by amendment hereafter, then that we should be constrained either by themselves or others (as we are already too much provoked) to publish them to the world, for the further manifestation and clearing of our cause and manner of dealing with them.   

The cautions (spoken of before, pag. 34. & 68) concerning the question following.  
Question. Whether such as sometimes have fallen from the truth, may afterward by the Church be taken into office.  
Answer. We take it not to be meet, without these and the like cautious: viz.  
FIrst that there be due consideration had both of the nature of the thing, and of the quality of the persons, and also of the estate of the Church.  
For the nature of the thing, 1. Whether it be from the truth to the Idolatry of the heathen, or to some false Christian worship: And here further, whether to the Papists, Anabaptists, Lutherans, or other Protestants professing reformation in sundry things, & those of great moment etc. 2. Whether at the first appearing & receiving of the truth, or when the adversaries have been sound & thoroughly convinced. 3. Whether in dispersion and absence from the Church, or living and remaining with it. 4. Whether drawn, circumvented, & overcome by others (as Aharon, and some of the Galatians, Exod. 32.1.23.35. Gal. 1.6.) or drawing, enticing & seducing of others (as they of whom we read Ezech. 44.12. Deut. 13.5.6.12.13.) Such as now also be they which publish writings against the truth, the Church, etc. 5. Whether they did voluntarily yield of themselves, or fainted being broken with troubles and persecutions. 6. Whether they joined themselves as members, or were present only at their worship. 7, Whether (being joined as members) they did partake only, or did administer also and execute their worship themselves. 8. Whether slipping aside for a time through infirmity, or falling away long & resisting the means offered for their recovery, or labouring (what they could) to change or abolish the true religion & worship of God. 9 Lastly, whether before or after the Church hath discussed and agreed what to do in this matter.  
For the quality of the persons, 1. Whether they were in office before or not. 2. Whether they be fit for office, or not. Else what blot should they bear in this behalf who for their sundry defects are altogether unfit, & therefore never to be taken into office, though they never had fallen from the truth? As they of Aaron's seed, who had a blemish in their body, might never be Priests, though they did never fall to Idolatry. Lev. 21.17. etc.  
For the estate of the Church, 1. Whether it were but newly and weakly entered into the faith and way of Christ, or had been long and well established therein. 2. Whether as yet it were unsettled and tossed hither and thither, to and fro, or were settled and well together. 3. Whether it have great and present need of some to be taken into office. 4. Whether it have others in all respects, as fit to be chosen. As Paul when he refused john Mark, had Silas, whom he chose to take with him, Act. 15.25.26.27.32.38.40.  
Secondly, that the Church do well know or try such as have so fallen, afore they do afterward entertain them into office. As Paul may be noted to have done with Mark, whom yet Barnabas did sooner receive, as being his sister's son, well known unto him before. Col. 4.10. & 2 Tim. 4.11. with Act. 15.38.39.  
Finally, that none be contentious, but that all of us duly considering the former cautions and the like, we take the fittest whom God in this estate of the Church doth offer, endeavouring to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace, that we may with love and comfort proceed in that whereunto we are come: to the praise of God, and to the further building & upholding of the whole Church & of 
* Aswell those that have fallen as the rest.  all the members thereof in the truth of the Gospel of jesus Christ. 1 Cor. 11.16. Ephe. 4.2.3. Phil. 3.15.16. Gal. 6.16.  
This for the present, so to be minded & observed, as if others shall at any time show us better from the word of God, we be alway ready to receive it in the Lord.   

An Answer to the Reasons alleged to prove the use of the Lords prayer as a Prayer.  

Objection. 1.  
AN express commandment neither contrary to nature, nor analogy of Faith, and agreeable also to the drift and tenor of the place, ought literally to be understood and obeyed.  
But this Math. 6.9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. And Luk. 11.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, say, Our Father, etc. is such an express commandment etc. Ergo It is also so to be understood and used.  

Answer.  
1. This reason was alleged before: Where see what is answered unto it. pag. 30.  
2. The Assumption or second part of the reason is but barely affirmed, not proved at all.  
3. How is it agreeable to the nature of prayer and analogy of faith, that one man or Church at any time should so pray, as ask all things that ever any in the world have needed or shall need upon any occasion whatsoever? Or that we now should offer such prayer and worship unto God, as we cannot have assurance by the Scriptures, that ever the Apostles or other Christians approved of God did so use at any time? Or to keep always a set form of words for our prayer to God?  
4. How is it agreeable to the drift and tenor of the place, that Christ did so command it to be used as he pretendeth? 1. For than it should be sin to pray at any time, and not to say it, seeing Christ hath thus given his commandment concerning it, Luk. 11.2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. etc. When ye pray, say, Our father etc. 2. And thus also we should be bound to say it twice over together at every time we use it: because Matthew and Luke in some words and clauses recorded it diversely: And who can say we ought to use the words of the one more than of the other? 3. But both 
* Mat. 6.9.  the commandment itself, and the circumstances about it noted in the Evangelists, show it to be given for a rule of prayer; and therefore so to use it, is that which is agreeable to the tenor and drift of the place: As we have heretofore showed in 
‡ apology. Discovery. Questions. Answ: to Mr H. etc.  diverse Treatises yet unanswered.  
5. By literal understanding of Christ's words in the same sermon, do the Anabaptists gather, that it is unlawful for Christians to take an oath, to go to war, to bear Magistracy etc. pleading the express words and commandment of Christ. Math. 5.34.39. etc. with many other pretences which they have thereabout. Shall we therefore admit of their errors, or understand those Scriptures, as they would have us? Not to speak of other as express speeches, or any collections thereabout: As Mat. 6.17. joh. 13.5.12.14.15.    

Objection. 2.  
2. If Christ had taught only to pray to this effect, than had he taught nothing but that which john's Disciples & all the faithful practised before: for the Prayers of the Saints, as of Solomon, Nehemiah, Daniel, were to that effect before.  

Answer.  
1. What if all this be granted? What would follow thereupon? Doth not christ in the same sermon of his, teach the very same things that Moses in effect had taught before? But now by reason of the false gloss of the Pharisees, he explained them, according to their true meaning. Math. 5.17. etc.  
2. In like manner there being great abuse about prayer, as is particularly noted by Matthew, Christ showeth them how to use it aright. Math. 6.5.6.7. etc.  
3. If he mean, that the prayers of the holy men in former times were of such things as here be comprised, it is true, that they then prayed to this effect: But if he mean that they prayed with like intendment and in like manner as Christ now taught the Apostles and Christians hereafter to do, he is deceived. For in their prayers they intended and looked at Christ to come, they prayed that God would send him according to his promise, that he might perform the things spoken concerning him, etc. But now Christ directed all hereafter to pray in his Name, as being come and exhibited according to the promises that went before concerning him. joh. 14.13.14. & 16.23.24.  
4. The purpose of Christ in giving this form of Prayer, was not only to teach to pray to this effect, but to give direction also concerning all other things that are needful to be known and observed in the right use of prayer. As in other books already published we have showed in diverse particulars.    

Objection. 3.  
Whatsoever Scripture hath in every respect the form of prayer, that is ●ot alone matter of Doctrine, but hath been used also as Prayer.  
But this Scripture Math. 6.9. hath in every respect the form of prayer: as, Our Father, give us, lead us, and amen, annexed in the end: ergo. And in deed how can they tell, which were prayers and which not, if not by their form of Petition? whereby they are distinguished from Doctrines, and rules proposed in an other form, as Mat. 7.7. & 21.22. 1 joh. 5.14.  

Answer.  
1. The Proposition or first part of the reason needeth proof: if he speak of the use of the very words, as they are set down. But if he speak only of praying for such things to such end and in such manner as is recorded, than we grant it: and he speaketh nothing against us, but fighteth with his own shadow.  
2. For some instances herein, let these Scriptures be considered, jer. 31.7. Hos. 14.3.4. joel. 2.17. which have in every respect the form of prayer, 
See also job 22.17. Esa. 44.17. jer. 2.27. Hab. 2.19.  and yet were given to be directions of the matter and manner of the prayers which then they should make, and not to prescribe them the very words which they should use. As likewise in this particular of Mat. 6.9— 13. compared with Luk. 11.2.3, 4.  
3. For the Assumption or second part of the reason, that it is propounded in form of prayer, see the answer before: pag. 31. And let them now at length tell us, if it were so to be used as they say, whether we should follow Matthew or Luke therein, and whether we should at the end thereof use the conclusion, and say Amen, or not: seeing Matthew hath it so, and Luke not.  
4. The very propounding of it in form of Petition containeth in it great and needful Doctrine for the right use of Prayer. Of which also see before, pag, 31.  
5 The Scriptures and rules of Prayer here mentioned by himself (Mat. 7.7. and 21.22. 1 joh. 5.14.) show that neither Christ intended, nor the Apostles understood it so, that those very words (as they are set down) should be our prayer unto God. For which observe these clauses, Ask, seek, knock: As a son asketh of h●● father bread, or fish etc. Mat. 7.7— 11. Whatsoever ye ask, etc. Mat. 21.22. If we ask any thing according to his will etc. 1 joh. 5.14. thinketh he, when Christ commended unto us the needful, careful, and fervent use of prayer saying, Ask, seek, knock etc. that his meaning was, Get by rote and say over, Our father which art in heaven, etc. Or is the saying of these words, prayer to God, as when a child being hungry cometh to his father and asketh bread, or having bread asketh fish or other food according to his need? Or why did Christ use such a general clause, Whatsoever ye ask: and john, If we ask any thing according to his will etc. if they had meant we should for our prayer use that form spoken of, wherein they knew are contained all things that can possibly be asked according to the will of God? Or should we therefore use these words only for our prayers, and no other at all? But of this question we have written other where already: Which may suffice, till we be answered.    

Objection. 4.  
4. In a duty to be used of all, the holy Ghost is plain: but if those very words are not to be used as Prayer, no Christian for 1500. year's & more, did ever understand our Lord's meaning.  

Answer.  
1 Solomon answereth, relating the words of Christ, that they are all plain to him that will understand, and straight to them that will find knowledge. Prov. 8.9.  
2. In the duties ●o be used of all, about the Sacraments, etc. the holy Ghost is plain: yet have Christians swerved from our Lords meaning thereabout, as long since as he speaketh of: yea even in the Apostles times they began in diverse things to go astray therefrom, 
1 Cor. 11.20. etc.  as any that is acquainted with the Scriptures may perceive.  
3. If erroneous pleading from former times, without scripture, were proof sufficient, how many and great errors might be pleaded for? As the Antichristians do, for a multitude of their heresies and abominations, which I will not stand here to particulate.  
4. See also what is answered before, when to like purpose he alleged Tertullians' testimony, pag. 23. etc.    

Exception. 1.  
But they say that the Apostles never used those very words in prayer. I answer:  
1. An express commandment is warrant sufficient without example.  

Answer.  
He taketh for granted that which he should prove, namely, that there is an express commandment so to use it as he pretendeth. Of which point we have spoken before. And let the Reader observe, how he cannot show by any Scripture at all, that the Apostles used those words for their prayer at any time. Neither can he deny, but they understood it aright, and prayed according to the true meaning thereof.    

Exception. 2.  
2. There is no example in the whole book of Gen. of the observation of the Sabaoth for 2369. years space after the institution of it. Gen. 2. Neither to come nearer, is there any example of baptizing, in the name of the Father, Son, and holy Ghost, yet is the commandment of Christ sufficient warrant so to do. Compare Math. 28.19. with Act. 10.48. & 19.5.  

Answer.  
What a reason is this? As if we thought nothing were observed of old, whereof there is not mention in the history; or as if no difference were to be put in the understanding of the Scriptures, but that if one be understood literally, then must all other likewise. He might aswell have told us, we read not in the Scriptures that Methuselah did ever eat any meat, and yet lived 969 years, 
Gen. 5.  the longest of any that are mentioned in the story. And for the Apostles and others at that time administering Baptism, how plain is it in the Scriptures cited by himself, that they baptized in the Name of the Lord, as they were appointed? If he could show but in general terms, that the Apostles at any time when they prayed, said over the Lord's prayer: though it be not written in particular that they said, Our father which art in heaven etc. there were some proportion in his manner of reason, which now is not.  
Besides, the Apostles and Evangelists themselves recording the institution and use of the Lords supper, observe not the same words alike, yet all of them agree in the same matter and substance? Mat. 26.26.27.28. Mark. 14.22.23.24. Luk. 22.19.20. 1 Cor. 11.24.25. And why should we not think likewise of their administration of Baptisms, that it was according to th● commandment of Christ, though the same particular words be not rehearsed? Or how can any make question of it, when it is recorded that they baptized (not in their own name, but) in the Name of the Lord: Act. 2, 38.41. & 10.48. Rom. 6, 3. 1 Cor. 1.13.15. Gal. 3.27. with Mat. 28.19. And so by their example have taught us how to understand and vs● these things aright?    

Exception. 3.  
3. It is the Anabaptists reasoning against children's baptism, ask for an example, when otherwise there is sufficient warrant so to do: yet are their Pretences as good or better than Mr johnsons in refusing obedience to our Lord's commandment for want of an example.  

Answer.  
A childish collection from the Anabaptists error about children's baptism. How often shall we speak it, that other sufficient warrant from the Scriptures, is as good as a thousand examples? And why will he needs show himself to be like the Anabaptists: who would bring in a worship of God, for which there cannot be showed sufficient warrant either by precept, or by example, or sound collection from the Scriptures; and so by consequence in time deprive the Church of that true worship of God which we are taught both by commandment and by example and by unanswerable reasons drawn out of the word of God? Wherein the very experience of former times so extremely corrupted in this exercise of prayer, might and ought to teach us to be more careful.  
For administering the seal of God's covenant, and sacrament of initiation, & consequently of Baptism, unto children being the seed of the faithful, we have both precept, example, and undeniable reasons out of the word of God: which I will not here stand to relate. If our reasons touching the use of the form of Prayer spoken of, be so weak as he pretendeth, why did he not undertake to answer them: but choose rather to insist upon the Pretences which now he hath purposely published concerning that Argument? And why will he never leave begging of that which he should prove, that i● 〈◊〉 our Lord's commandment to say over the very words prescribed, Mat. 6. ● Luk 11. for our prayer unto God?    

Exception. 4.  
4. The Prayers mentioned in the new Testament, are such as 〈◊〉 powered forth upon special occasion, as Act. 4.24. joh. 17.  

Answer.  
An absurd pretence: and such as wherein he is against himself, yielding that the Lords prayer is not to be used upon special occasion: or else he speaketh nothing to the purpose. And if it teach us not how to pray upon special occasion, how is it a perfect direction? Or if it do, & yet be not in such case to be used, how plain is it that Christ's meaning & the Apostles understanding of it was such as not to prescribe it for our prayer, but for our instruction and direction therein? Again Christ saith, When ye pray, say, Our father etc. therefore also upon special occasion, if that were his meaning, as he would persuade. Not to speak how themselves commonly hold and give out that it is such as is fit to be used at all times and for all occasions. So well they agree together.  
But why doth he cite here, joh. 17. wherein Christ's prayer a little before his death is mentioned? Is it to show that though Christ did not then use it, praying upon special occasion, yet at other times he did? If this b● his intendment, who will believe him that Christ who had no sin, could ask forgiveness of sin, as in that form of prayer is prescribed? If this be not his meaning, to what purpose is that Scripture alleged, unless it be to reason against himself, & to show still his own foolishness?    

Exception. 5.  
5 Let them show me an example where ever the Apostles prayed before their Sermons; if they can.  

Answer.  
1. Have they not read what is written of the Apostles, Act. 6.4. how they said to the brethren at jerusalem, Look ye out men whom we may appoint to this business (of the Deacons office): And we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministration of the word? Nor how the Apostle Paul gave direction concerning public prayer, when he wrote to the Churches and to Timothee about public doctrine, whether it were in prophetical or ministerial use of the word of God. 1 Cor. 11.4. and 14. chap. 1 Tim. 1. and 2. chap. Or when Paul taught Timothee that the food of the body is to be sanctified unto us by prayer, 
2 Tim. 4.4.5.  should he not think likewise of the food of the soul?  
2. And what though the particular circumstance of time (before, or after) be not set down? Or that the Apostles having to deal with several sorts of persons & occasions, did diversely carry themselves according thereunto?  
3. Or doth it not lie upon the Ministers in public, to be aswell the mouth of the Church unto God in prayer, as to be the mouth of God to the Church in doctrine? Or should we think that the Apostles did not carefully perform the whole work of the Ministry committed unto them?  
4. Finally, let these men show us an example in the Apostles or Primitive Churches, where ever they said their prayers over by tote; or used a book of Common prayer among them; or read any prayers at all for their prayer to God; or had Archbishops, Lordbishops, Archdeacon's, Priests, Parsons, Vicars, etc. either for use of prayer, or for any other service Ministry or government of the Churches of Christ.  
Finis.