AN ANSWER To the unjust complaints OF William Best, And of such other as have subscribed thereunto. Also an ANSWER to Mr. john Davenport, TOUCHING His Report of some passages, His Allegations of Scripture against the baptising of some kind of Infants, His Protestation about the publishing of his writings. By JOHN PAGET. At AMSTERDAM, Printed by john Fredericksz Stam, dwelling by the South-Church, at the sign of the HOPE. ANNO MDCXXXV. A Preface to the Reader. CHRISTIAN Reader, there came forth of late an injurious Pamphlet, entitled A just complaint against an unjust doer; wherein is proclaimed to the world, The miserable slavery & bondage of the English Church at Amsterdam: and the blame of this misery is laid upon me, as being procured by my tyrannical government & corrupt doctrine etc. Heinous accusations denounced as with sound of Trumpet from an high pinnacle of the Printers Tower, and blown abroad into many Countries. My hope and help against this tempestuous blast, is in that our merciful and faithful Advocate, who pleads the cause of his servants, and brings forth their righteousness as the light, and their judgements as the noon day. To consider who have been the special Actors in this work, may give some light unto the Readers for the better discerning and judging thereof. For as Mr. Davenport in his Protestation saith, he knew not neither could imagine what motive set this Publisher upon this work, unless he knew the man: So when the Readers shall in some part know the persons that have been the chief 〈◊〉, they may in some part know or imagine what motive did set their discontented humours upon this scandalous enterprise. The Printer hereof Sa. St. that left out his name in the title-page, did yet of himself voluntarily acknowledge that which he had done therein. Now he being a Brownist, no marvel if he had a hand therein. Those that framed the Title, who did also make the conclusion of this book, having a hand either jointly or severally, both in the beginning and end thereof, are by their own confession known to be Brownists, I.C. and S. St. It is not strange that these men for the furtherance of their own cause, should encourage these complainants against me, and as it were clap them on the shoulder, and say unto them in their conclusion, stand fast therefore, quit you like men in striving for the maintenance of this part of the faith, etc. The principal Publisher hereof, that sought help of the Brownists, & caused it to be printed, is found to be Wi. Be. the foreman of the subscribers, who though in the subscription he have the foremost standing, yet that he is one of the lest understanding among them, appeareth by his rash proceed in this business. The Printer of the Brownists noted him to be a Simplician, when he would not otherwise express his name. And well might they accounted him a simple Person, that would suffer them to have a hand both in the Title & conclusion of his book, he not perceaving the evil thereof. Mr. Davenport himself deciphers him as an injurious one, a sour of discord, and a busy body in other men's matters. The first part of the Pamphlet was made by Mr. Davenp. containing a threefold writing, partly against the Classis, & partly against me, each of them having his name subscribed thereunto. Now howsoever Mr. Davenport be a man greatly renowned & famous for his learning and gifts in preaching, yet 〈◊〉 (●s it seemeth) discontented that his calling among us did not succeed, and coming nearer unto the Brownists in this question about baptism then unto us, it is therefore the less marvel that he also had a hand in writing complaints against me for not desiring him. The two Persons of trust, of whom Mr. Davenport speaks in his Protestation, to whom he committed his writings for the satisfaction of others, before they were printed, are unknown unto me, otherwise then by conjecture. His secret friends that are my secret enemies, do yet walk in the dark. The second part of the Pamphlet is subscribed with the names of many persons among us, all of them special friends of Mr. Davenport, that have made it their complaint and protestation against me; though many others among us do utterly dislike and disclaim that which is done by them. Divers of them having formerly been Brownists, and left their separation to come unto us, do yet show hereby that they still cleave too much unto some of their opinions. And for some others of them, I wish that they had not showed so much affection and respect that way. The Person that brought these complaints into such frame and method, doth yet lurk in darkness, as becometh such a work, neither is he yet certainly known. Divers of the subscribers themselves do profess, that they know not who wrote them, and such as do know, do yet hide the same. One fore-reader of the complaints to such as met together in the house of N.I. for the subscribing of them, is confessed to be Io. Tra. one that is no member of our Church, one that was once a Brownist of Mr. Robinson's company, and whether he have renounced that Church, or they him, or have any dimission from that Church, or whether he be now of any Church or none, I know not. Might they not well have suspected the matter, to see such an instrument employed in the business? The Title of the Pamphlet is, as I hear, generally disliked by the subscribers & complainants themselves, and by some of them condemned as a vile Title. But the truth is, As is the one, so is the other: If the complaints be just, then is the Title just, being framed according to the contents & special subject of the book: if the Title be a vile Title, then is the book also as vile; neither have I so much cause to complain of the Brownists that made the Title, as of them that made the book. If this Church be deprived of that liberty and power which Christ hath given it, etc. If the Elders be deprived of their power in government, for the good of the Church, etc. If I have subjected the Church under the undue power of the Classis, etc. If these and the like assertions in their book be true, then is the Title and superscription as lawful as the subscription; then is there cause to complain of the miserable slavery and bondage of this Church, and of Tyrannical government, etc. Than is there cause to commend & prefer the liberty and freedom of the Brownists, which are not subject unto the power of any Classis or Synod, before the government of other Reformed Churches. And then (if these complainants had by the Word of God justified their complaints) it were reasonable that all the ancient churches of God in Europe should come to these complainants, and learn of them their new form of government. But I find no just ground that these opposites bring for their complaints, nor any due proof of their many reproofs: therefore though I be covered with reproach by them, I do yet comfort myself in the Lord. That which some will have to be the slavery and bondage of a Church, that I esteem to be the liberty, safety and preservation of Churches. That which they count a Tyrannical government, that I believe to be a Sanctuary against Tyranny. That single uncompounded policy (as Mr. jacob calls it) whereby particular Congregations are made to be independent, not standing under any other Ecclesiastical authority out of themselves, that I conceive to bring with it manifold disorders, confusion and dissipation of Churches. For the testimony of this truth, I am not ashamed to suffer that reproach which some lay upon me. Though I have already been smitten on the right cheek, yet am I ready to turn the other also, rather than to forsake this truth, which I judge to be of great importance. Yea if I were cast upon my deathbed, ready to deliver up my soul into the hands of the Lord, I should judge it to be my duty, and a special fruit of my love and care for the flock of God, among my last words to warn them of these things, as now I do. And for these my opposite brethren, I desire they would be like-minded, that laying aside all prejudice and inordinate affection, they would suffer themselves to be better informed in these things, wherein they have been evidently mistaken through want of due circumspection; that they would labour to do those things, which God would have them to do, and whereof they are to give an account unto him, they know not how soon. It cannot but be grievous to see contentions abound and overflow, to see enemies of the Church insult and hardened in schism and error; yet is not the truth to be betrayed or neglected. Nature and Religion teach men to answer for themselves when they are accused, and to make a defensive, when others make an offensive war. The state of Churches at this day is like unto a glassy Sea mingled with fire, Rev. 15.2. with fire of fervent contentions at home and abroad, yet even there do the faithful stand with the Harps of God rejoicing in the profession of that truth, which is oppugned and contended against. As for myself, how unjustly soever I am dealt withal in this kind, being called as it were to the public bar of a general judgement before the world, and accused before all men, in this day of man, yet while I learn thereby to judge myself, striving still, and more than formerly, to be further of from the evils unjustly imputed unto me, my hope is that the Lord will do me good by these wrongs, and that I shall reap such fruit, as shall increase my comfort in the day of the Lord. And as for others, one special fruit that I expect from this controversy, is that those which are wise and godly, will hereby take occasion to think more seriously of these things, taking heed what new forms of Churches and Church-government they frame unto themselves, or commend unto others. For these my opposites I wish unto them, that as some of them have already discerned their fault in this unadvised subscription, that so the rest also following their example, may come to the sight and confession of their error, and thereby find true rest and peace unto their souls. The God of glory, that brings light out of darkness, and greater love of truth from sight of dangerous errors, guide us by his Word, and illuminate us by his spirit, to discern the things that differ, and to follow that which is good, to ponder the path of our feet, and to turn neither to the right hand nor to the left. AMEN. JOH. PAGET. AN ANSWER To the Complaints of WILLIAM BEST and others that together with him subscribed their names thereunto. And herein is inserted An Answer to Mr. DAVENPORT touching his Report of some proceed about his calling to the English Church in AMSTERDAM. complainants. SECTION I THe grievances and complaints of the burdened and oppressed members of the English Church in Amsterdam. Anno 1634. the 18 of October. ANSWER. IN the title and forefront of this writing, the things that first offer themselves unto our view are these: The Argument of it, which is grievances and complaints; The persons by whom it was written, and ●ese described by their profession, members of the Church, by the designation thereof, both in respect of the ●ation, the English Church, and of 〈◊〉 place, in Amsterdam; by their condition, the burdened and oppressed, and by the time of year, month, and day, Anno 163●. Octob. 1●. For the Argument; these grievances and complaints would have been more grievous unto me, if the Lord in his goodness had not provided a Record of the like unjust complaints against his dearest servants. Exod. 16.2.3. & 17. 2-7. Numb. 14. 1-10. & 16.1.2.3. & v. 41. with Numb. 12.3. How often did Israel in the wilderness rise up against Moses and Aaron? sometimes the chieftains, men of renown and famous in the congregation; sometimes the whole congregation of Israel; sometimes crying out and lifting up their voices with weeping; sometimes accusing them as if they had taken too much upon them, and lifted up themselves above the Church of God, and as if they had killed the people of the Lord; yea wishing rather to bear the burdens of Egypt, and the cruel yoke of Pharaoh in the house of bondage, then to carry the sweet yoke of the Lord under the guidance of Moses the meekest man on earth? What wonder then if I be brought to wade through the fords of Meribah and Massah, and made to drink of the waters of strife and contention? For the persons, Professors and members of the Church. To be opposed and complained of by such might aggravate the grief, but that the Holy Ghost showeth, Sol. Song. 1.5.6. Mat. 23.37 1. Cor. 1.11. & 6.5.6. Gal. 5.15. that the godly have the sons of their mother to be angry against them, and not only those without, but even the members of the Church, living in her bosom. Israelites under the Law, and Christians under the Gospel, have been instruments of trouble and raysers of strife. The Churches of the jews, o● the Corinthians, of the Galathians and others, are pregnant witness hereof, lest any should stumble at the like offences. When they do more particularly design of what Church they a● members, viz. of the English Church at Amsterdam, whereof I am Minister, this is yet further cause of grief. It was grievous unto David, when those that came out of his own bowels were the instruments of his trouble and affliction: and so it cannot but be grievous when out of the bowels of the same Church there arise up such 〈◊〉 are instruments of contention to trouble those that have at lest 〈◊〉 some weak measure endeavoured to do the office of a father un●● them. Esa. 1.2. But we see the father of father's complaining and calling heaven and earth to witness that he himself had found such dealing; that he had nourished and brought up children, and that yet they had rebelled even against him: and therefore it aught not to seem strange, if men from men, and fathers from children do find cause of complaint. And for the place, that this is done, at Amsterdam, where the contentions of the Brownists are already so infamous, both to the common reproach of our own nation here for breeding and sending forth so many contentious persons unto them, and to the common reproach of this City in England, for nourishing and entertaining the same: this I say, doth also make me the more ashamed, to think ●hat occasion is hereby given unto adversaries to reckon us with those other authors of schism. The very name of this city, and the injury that is done unto it by those that multiply contentions therein, might justly have restrained these complainants from doing new wrong unto the City of their habitation, by so great a work of new strife in the mids thereof. The condition of those complainants is described by the title of the burdened and oppressed: but in stead thereof they might much more justly have styled themselves the burtheners and oppressors, and this both in respect of me and of themselves. They burden me with a load of slanders in the several parts of this their writing, as will appear in the answer thereof: so that as the Lord complained of ingrateful men, Amos 2.13 I am pressed under you as a cart is pressed that is full of sheaves, so may I complain of their pressing me with reproaches. The fittest title for this their writing might have been this, The cartload of reproaches. They burden themselves also and are guilty of their own oppression, when in this writing they complain of being subjected unto the undue power of the Classis: for were they not under the wings of this authority and power of the Classis, they would be deprived of that help and refuge which the Classis affordeth unto those that are burdened and oppressed in a particular Congregation. Moreover it is to be observed how these complainants intitling themselves indefinitely the burdened and oppressed members of the English Church, do herein speak ambiguously, and the words may be so understood, as if the body of the Church were here meant by the members of the English Church. But in such a meaning their words are notoriously false. These 21 subscribers are not the Church, but a faction in the Church, and the greatest part of the congregation (so far as I hear) do complain of these maintainers. Those complainants are such a congregation as David mentioneth in the Psalm, Psal. 58.1. Do ye indeed speak righteousness, O Congregation? be speaks not to the whole congregation of Israel, but to a congregation in the congregation, that is to say to a faction in the Church. The original word there used, Elem. carries in it the signification of a sheaf of corn: for as in a sheaf many stalks are bound together, so in a fact●● many people are combined together in an enterprise. The writing 〈◊〉 these complainants is like unto jonath Elem rechokim, Psal. 56. title. which doth not signify as in the old translation, the dumb dove in a fare country, neither would it in such sense agreed with these complainants, who are no dumb doves, but rather as the clamorous birds. The words do signify the oppression of a faction of them that are far off, the oppression and trouble which a faction worketh, and a faction of such as are far off and such are these accusers, though not far off as the Philistines in Gash, yet far off from their own country, and bold in another where they are strangers, and also as fare from truth and equity in this their writing that follows. The time of their writing these complaints was Anno 1634. Octob. 18. For the year it was a time when the Churches of God were in great affliction, by the oppression of Antichrist, the enemy prevailing so much in Dutch-land. And these judgements of God abounding in such measure near unto us, might have restrained these men from so insolent an enterprise in such a time. For the day of the month it was unto me a day of mourning, when God had taken out of this world a godly member of our Church, and my faithful servant, who being dead and yet unburied, and myself also weak and sickly, Ezek. 24.17.22. even just at this time, in stead of the bread of men, which neighbours of old used to bring unto mourners for the comforting of them, these importunate complainants reached me this reproachful writing as a sponge of vinegar upon a reed. So was Christ comforted by the jews on his cross; Mark. 15.36. and the servant is not above his Lord. I have a long time, with great patience borne many reproaches; but now being so heinously accused, and so vehemently urged by the importunity of these brethren that have made this most unreasonable and unjust writing against me, I should betray mine own innocency, and prejudice both the profession of Christianity, and the work of my ministry, which God hath committed unto me, if I should not give answer unto them, and make an Apology for myself, as divers worthy servants of God in like case have done. And yet howsoever I take liberty to myself to speak freely unto my opposites in showing them their transgression, my purpose notwithstanding is by the grace of God not to do the lest wrong unto them, for the greatest which they have done unto me. And to this end, I beseech his heavenly Majesty to guide me with his Spirit in all and every one of my answers, that I may not err from this mark which I have set up unto myself: Hab. 2.1. but that being set with the Prophet upon my watch, I may see what he will say unto me, and what I shall answer unto him that reproveth and reproacheth me. complainants. SECT. II. WHereas offence hath been taken that some of us whose names are underwritten, did absent ourselves from the Lords supper the last communion day; we thought it good to give the reason of our absences in writing, with our names subscribed thereunto: being willing to bear our blame, if it shall be proved to us out of the Word of God, that we have sinned in so doing, for which we confess that the cause thereof was no contempt or sleight account of the Lords supper, the free enjoyment whereof in a right manner, we accounted an especial privilege, and whatsoever hindereth us from it a very grievous affliction. In which respect we are the more deeply and inwardly greeved with the sinful proceed of Mr. john Paget, which deprived us of so great a comfort at that time. For howsoever we do not think that the personal sin of any man can defile the ordinances of God to us, if we be meet and fit to partake thereof; yet we know that a man may make himself partaker of other m●ns ●●its, by neglecting his duty in seeking reformation, and so communicate unworthily. Wherhfore having waited that some thing should have been done by others in this case, but in vain, we durst not approach to the Lords supper, till we had in some measure discharged our duties in this particular, which we thought we should have a fit opportunity to do, when we should be called upon to show the reasons of our absence at that time, which formerly we could not obtain. ANSWER. WE see in the subscription two sorts of complainants; the first such as withdrew themselves from the Lord's supper, the other such as notwithstanding their complaint, did yet hold communion with the Church in the participation of the Sacrament. Of the first sort are those 9 that are foremost in the subscription; of the second, those 12 that subscribed last. To the first sort in the first place, I answer, 1. As for those plausible speeches, & pretences of Reverence to the ordinance of God, they are such as that the Brownists themselves will say as much even in the midst of their separation. They will be content to profess that they do not separate out of any contempt or sleight account of the Lords supper, the free enjoyment whereof in a right manner, they accounted an especial privilege, and whatsoever hindereth them from it a very grievous affliction. Thus far the Brownists may acknowledge by their own principles touching their separation one from another: and what singular thing have these complainants then spoken in excuse of themselves? 2. From excusing of themselves they proceed to the accusing of me, and complain that the sinful proceed of Mr. john Paget have deprived them of so great a benefit at that time. But had these complainants well considered their own ways, and the way of truth, they would then have left the complaint upon themselves, and upon the proceed of Mr. john Davenport. As for themselves, it is their slander of me, which they can never prove, that I have deprived them of the benefit of the Lords supper. And as for Mr. Davenport, he is guilty of nourishing contention in our Church, while those roots of bitterness and evil weeds of unjust complaints are watered by him: whiles he himself by his writing which was first secretly spread abroad among our people, doth make the like yea & many the very same complaints that these men have. Hereby they are confirmed in their murmurings, and their hands are strengthened unto evil. Book of Complaints p. 12. His pretence of care to preserve my peace and the Churches, cannot excuse him: he saith of our Church, had he not exercised much patience and industry, it would certainly have fallen from me, etc. But as he doth vainly praise himself and wrong me, so doth he notoriously dishonour and wrong the body of our Church, of which he speaks indefinitely without exception. For 1. he doth hereby accuse our Church generally to be of a schismatical disposition, either through their blindness, or of a malicious purpose, in being so ready to break communion, and to rend themselves from their Pastor. His folly & vain credulity is the more in that he avoucheth this with such a peremptory asseveration, certainly they would have fallen from him. The untruth of this his assertion appeareth in the greater part of the congregation, by the testimony of their respect unto me, and of their hatred of schism, witnessed partly by their diligent attendance upon the ministry of the Word, and partly by their speeches otherways. 2. For these complainants themselves though in their haste and discontentment, they might happily have threatened to leave communion, and to forsake the Church, yet is it not credible, especially for the greater part that they would have been so wicked and scandalous as Mr. Davenport would have us to believe. And even these 9 that abstained lately from the Lord's supper for once, do here in this place seek to excuse themselves for it, when they say that they durst not approach to the Lords supper, till they had in some measure discharged their duties, etc. which seems to import they had no absolute purpose of making a rent. 3. His vain glory in this confident asseveration is so much the greater, in that he arrogates unto himself the hindering of them from so great wickedness, ascribing it to his own great patience and industry; and that otherwise they would certainly have done it. What is this else but to magnify himself with the diminishing of the grace and power of God; as though God had not other means enough without Mr. Davenport; and without his industry to have sta●ed these complainants from such a scandalous act? It is against modesty and conscience to pronounce so certainly touching the issue of things to come. Yea though these complainants themselves should all of them still presume to say in like manner, that had it not been for Mr. Davenport, they would certainly have made a separation, yet were not such rash speeches to be rested upon, Prov. 20.24. & 16.1.9. jer. 10.23. seeing the Lord doth so often frustrate such vain purposes and resolutions by persuading the heart of man, and turning it another way. But touching his industry and service in this business more hereafter. 4. Though some of these inordinate complainants have gone yet further; though others have gone sometimes to hear the Brownists, and to communicate with them in the publicq worship of God; though this be a dangerous tempting of God, and offensive diverse ways: yet cannot men certainly conclude a falling away thereupon. The slippery and irregular practices of unsettled persons are so many and diverse, that men cannot build a peremptory asseveration touching the issues of them. 3. To come nearer unto the special point of the controversy, it is a defective and too short a rule of keeping communion, which they note in showing their judgement that the personal sin of any man cannot defile the ordinances of God unto us, if we be meet, etc. for neither the personal sin of any man, nor yet the sins and corruptions which are in the very estate of a Church, in the ministry, offices, calling, government and order thereof, can defile the ordinances of God unto us, so long as we ourselves do not practise and act evil, nor give any approbation thereof. Luke 1.6.8 with Mat. 15.6.9. For as formerly in the Church of the jews, so now presently in divers true Churches, besides the personal sins of men, there be many corruptions in the ministry, order and government thereof, and yet are not the ordinances of God therein defiled unto such as do their duty in their own eschewing and witnessing against evil. 4. If this rule were not defective, it could not (according to their profession) be any just excuse or warrant unto these complainants of keeping communion in our Church: for they do not only accuse me of personal sin, but show that the very estate, order and government of our Church is corrupt●● thereby. If the Church be deprived of that power which Christ hath given it in the free choice of their Pastor; if the Elders be deprived of their power in government; if the Church be by me subjected unto an undue power of the Classis, as they complain; then is the very estate of our Church an enthralled estate, wanting the liberty & power of Christ. And therefore if either my personal sin, or if the publiq corrupt estate of our Church could defile the ordinances of God unto them, than could they not keep communion with us, But I suppose it is their uncircumspection that made them or their scribe to allege this insufficient rule of keeping communion, rather than their advised and settled judgement. 5. If these complainants be willing to bear their blame (as they profess here) when their sin is proved unto them out of the word of God: then let them look upon these words of God, where he ordained by Moses, that * Numb. 9.13. the man which neglected to keep the Passeover, should bear his sin; where Christ † 1. Cor. 11.24.25. commanded to observe the Sacrament of his Supper, in remembrance of him; where the H. Ghost requires that we should * Heb. 10.25. not forsake the assembling of ourselves together. These express commandments have been transgressed by these that withdrew themselves. 6. Though men may complain of known evils to preserve themselves from partaking in other men's sins; yet the preposterous order of these men is inexcusable, that first separated from a solemn act of religion with the Church of God, jer. 8.7. Eph. 4. 2●.27. & 5.16. Prov. 15.23. & 25.11. and afterwards came to tell the cause thereof; doing that in the last place which should have been done in the first, contrary to the direction of the Holy Ghost, who teacheth us to know the times, and to redeem them, and to observe the fit seasons for performing of our duties. 7. If men have neglected their duty for reforming of evil in others unto the very day of communion in the Lord's Supper, and time permit not then to complain, what remains then to be done? shall men with these complainants leave the communion for that time, and so add to their former neglect a new offence and scandal? we have no such rule or commandment from God: but the negligent are to be humbled in soul presently before the Lord, and pardon is to be des●●●d in Christ, with purpose of performing their duty upon the next opportunity, which being done, they may then with good conscience approach unto the table of the Lord, Isa. 65.24. who is ready instantly to forgive. 8. When men pretending to testify against evils, in stead of just complaints do bring reproach and slanders, and complaints of that which is good and lawful, then in stead of clearing themselves they are more polluted. james 3.6. Prov. 17.15. Their own tongue defileth them. And that this is the case of these complainants, once guilty for their forsaking of the communion, and double guilty for their testification afterwards, the sequel will plainly manifest. 9 Whereas they tell, how they waited that some thing should have been done by others, but in vain, etc. what they mean hereby I know not, except it be of the Eldership calling upon them to show the reasons of their absence from the Lords Supper, of which they speak also. Now although no man can excuse his own neglect of duty by waiting on others, yet the waiting of these men in this particular, cannot be said to have been in vain: for had they not prevented it by bringing this their writing, it was agreed in the Eldership, that in their visitation before the time of the next following communion, they should have been spoken unto touching the reasons of their absence. And this might have been done by the Elders, though I was not able through weakness at that time to have gone about with them. 10. Above others William Best who is the foreman in this subscription, hath the lest colour of excuse for his offence and disorder in leaving the communion: for he having been with the Eldership before, and made known his complaints both by word & writing; suppose his complaint had been just, what needed he now to withdraw himself for fear of partaking with those sins, against which he had so solemnly testified already? It seems he was more forward than others to complain, and yet more ignorant than the rest of the nature of lawful communion. 11. Seeing W.B. could thus find an opportunity to come unto the consistory, and there to discharge his imagined duty, by showing his grievances and complaints both by word and writing, and was thereupon presently informed touching his duty in the consistory, and afterwards visited by me at his own house, and conferred again withal for his further information: why might not any one of these 9 complainants have done the like? Hereby it appears how unjust that part of their complaint is, when touching such opportunity they say, that formerly they could not obtain it. For why might not each of them have taken their desired opportunity as well as he, and in such manner as he did, before any discommunion had been made by them? But in this also he is most of all to be blamed, that whereas he actually had this opportunity, and full liberty of declaring his mind, he not only absented himself, but also sets his hand and subscribes his name to this complaint as well as others, as if he could not formerly have obtained that, which he know that he had. 12. The offence of L. C. being a Deacon of the Church, is also the greater in this regard, not only in leaving the communion whereunto he was bound as a Christian, but also in leaving his service and attendance upon the Lord's table, whereunto he was bound as a Deacon, and which he was wont to perform with the rest of the Deacons. Every evil example of such an one becomes a greater stumbling-block, doth more hurt to others and procureth more blame to themselves. 13. It is to be observed that the 9 first are condemned by the 12 latter subscribers, who though they join with the first in the complaint, yet did not join with them in the schism, but kept themselves pure from the scandal of separation. If these 12 did lawfully in communicating with us, than did the other 9 unlawfully in refusing of communion. If they will not learn of me, yet let them receive instruction from their own fellows. 14. Before the 9 separatours had resolved upon a matter of so great danger in forsaking the table of the Lord, especially if they had been so deeply and inwardly grieved, as they pretend, for losing so great a comfort of the Lords Supper, than it had been meet for the preventing both of their own grief and others scandal, that they should have taken advice of Mr. Davenport, with whom they were familiar most of them, and all had opportunity enough thereunto, Prov. 15.22 for by counsel thoughts are established. To refuse counsel in matters of great weight and danger, when it may easily he had, what is it 〈◊〉 but to wink with the eyes for fear of seeing the truth? If they had his counsel & refused it, they are in that regard the more culpable, both for committing such an offence at first, and for not repenting of it since. 15. As for the 9 in regard of communion; so in regard of the complaints following, godly wisdom & good conscience required of them all, both of the 9 first & 12 latter complainants, that they should have the counsel of Mr. Davenport, touching such weighty points of government, as do concern the good estate not of our Church only, but of other reformed Churches in these countries, before they had set their hands unto such heinous accusations, as are here contrived by them. If they did not consult with him, their headlong and headstrong rashness was extraordinary great. And if he being consulted withal did approve of this their reproachful writing, then will it appear that he hath been an extraordinary author of contention & disturber of our peace: yea such an one as when he himself could not receive a calling into the ministry among us, according to that manner he liked, did then go about to subvert my ministry, by bringing it into reproach with our people. complainants. SECT. III. WE conceive that Mr. Paget doth administer the Lord's Supper to us by virtue of his Pastoral office, whereunto he hath been called in this Church, and that amongst communicants, especially Pastor and people there should be an union in Christian love and affection, and communion in all the fruits thereof, one whereof is seasonable admonition, which in case of publiq scandal and offence, must be publiq 〈◊〉 we conceive it is in this present case. Which we would have borne if the injury had been but personal to any one of us, and covered if it had been a mere infirmity, or but a private offence; but seeing the matter is a publiq injury, and obstinately persisted in to the great dishonour of God, and hurt to the Church, w● are not to be silent any longer, but by these presents do testify to a●●●en, principally to you the Elders of this Church, That howsoever Mr. Paget beareth the name, filleth up the place, and doth many works of a Pastor amongst us: Yet he doth not behave himself, as becometh a Pastor, neither in government, nor in doctrine towards us. ANSWER. AS there is a liberty and duty of Christians sometimes to admonish even those that are no members of the Church: as the bond for performance of this duty is more straight among those that are by covenant united into the same particular Church: and as the Pastor himself is not exempted from receiving admonition: so this same relation betwixt Pastor and people, doth bind them in the performance of this duty to him, whom God hath set in his stead to teach and govern his people, 2. Cor. 5.20. 1. Thes. 5.12.13. Heb. 13.17. to see that they have both a just ground of their admonition, and that they perform it in a modest and reverend manner. But neither of these things have been observed in the offensive and unconscionable writing of these complainants, either towards me or to that whole assembly of Ministers in the Classis, who altogether with me are most unworthily and injuriously dealt withal by these persons. If these slanderous accusations be the fruit of their Christian love and affection, what shall be the fruit of their contrary passions? And as for seasonable admonition I marvel that they are not ashamed to speak thereof: for 1. is it seasonable admonition to come now and complain of matters done above 20 years agone, about Mr. Forbes, and Mr. Parker? 2. Is it seasonable admonition for men first to forsake the communion, and afterwards by admonition to tell the cause thereof, in such a preposterous order as the first rank of the complainants have done? 3. Is it seasonable admonition after matters have been brought unto the Classis, and there judged and my innocency there manifested, to come with new complaints in rehearsing of the same matters, as is often done in this writing? where shall men lightly find more unreasonable and more unseasonable admonitions than these? Again, to mollify the great evil of their heinous accusations, they make a preamble wherein they make profession of the goodness, gentleness and patience which they would have showed, and this in diverse degrees: The first degree of their patience is, that if the injury had been but personal to any one of them, they would have borne it: But what if it had been personal to any two of them, had it then been intolerable, and not to be borne? The second degree of patience and gentleness in conceit, is, that if it had been a mere infirmity, they would have covered it: But I demand of them, how they know when a fault is committed of mere infirmity? and again whether no faults are to be covered, but those which are mere infirmities: and if other may be, why do they boast for the very imagination of that they would do in this? A third degree of their pretended favour, is to have covered my fault, if it had been but a private offence. But what if no offence at all have been committed against them? What if their accusations be notoriously false? Prov. 25.14. Than as he that boasteth of false liberality, is like unto clouds & wind without rain; so are these men in their boasted favours and patience. And besides even publiq offences may be made more publiq than is meet; & yet these men profess to do so, when they say in this place, that by these presents they do testify unto all men, etc. But further they do not only boast of that which they were willing to have done, but of that which they have done; for when to aggravate my offence, they do now say, that they are to be silent no longer, they do hereby imply, that before this their writing they have used long silence. Now to prove that formerly they have not been silent men, I have many witnesses; and first I allege these two witnesses against them, the Dam, & the Burse, the Marketplace and the Exchange: Two other witnesses are the Classis and the Consistory. Again I allege two other witnesses England, and Netherlands, through both which the clamours that a● here raised by them are scattered abroad. Ministers and people friends and foes can be witnesses hereof. Prov. 12.10. If formerly they have ben● silent, what clamours must I now expect, when they break their silence? The Holy Ghost shows that the very mercies themselves i● some men are cruel; such are the former favours of these complainants. If favours be such, and their courtesy so hard, how cruel sha● their cruelty itself be? To proceed, it is not enough for them to accuse me of sinful proceed, but to aggravate the matter, they do in their preamble avouch that this injury is obstinately persisted in to the great dishonour of God, etc. 1. I answer, that hereby they do make themselves guilty of great & wicked slander. That person is to be accounted obstinate, who having his sin in due manner showed unto him out of the Word of God, doth yet continued therein without any professed purpose of reformation. But this they have not done unto me, I may truly say with job, be it that I have erred, mine error remaineth with me: job 19.4. though ye magnify yourselves against me, yet which of you have convinced me of error? Let this be considered more particularly. 2. When some of these complainants have upon occasion objected unto me, that nothing but customs & examples of men were urged against Mr. Davenport; I signified unto them at diverse times, that if Mr. Davenport would set down any reasons from the Scripture for the maintenance of his opinion, I would (Good willing) endeavour to give him an answer by writing from the Scriptures, and if I could not answer his arguments & allegations, I would then be of his mind, & labour to join with him, and stand for that practice he required. But this offer not being accepted, nor acceptance procured by them, what colour of reason had they to accuse me of obstinacy? 3. If they think Mr. Davenports writing which he gave to the Classis with the reasons of his opinion, might serve to convince me, and thereupon infer that I am obstinate, they are far deceived, for neither is their any such convincing power in any of his allegations, as I hope will be manifested by others. And suppose these maintainers do judge otherwise, yet had there been a few drops of charitable construction in them, they might at lest have conceived that I erred through the example of so many learned Ministers concurring in judgement with me, and so being carried away with the stream, that my offence was of ignorance and not of obstinacy. I myself do also judge even of some of these my accusers, that they are ignorantly seduced through the example of others, rather then of an obstinate mind. 4. As for the several heads of their complaints, if they mean that I am obstinate in each of them (for they have not excepted any) then is their slander yet the greater; for where & when, or by what Scripture or sound reason have they proved me an obstinate offendor therein? But furthermore, it is not yet enough for them simply to accuse me of obstinacy; but they come unto a solemn Testification, and say that by these presents they testify to all men, and principally to the Elders of this Church, That howsoever Mr. Paget beareth the name, filleth up the place and doth many works of a Pastor. Yet he doth not behave himself as becometh a Pastor, neither in government nor in doctrine towards us. Against this vehement & unjust accusation, I have these comforts wherewith I do comfort myself in God. 1. My unfeigned desire and endeavour hath been to serve the Lord in the ministry of the Gospel, and thereby to edify his people. Before I was called to the ministry, I felt my heart strongly inclined thereunto, and did so direct my studies, that I might be prepared thereunto. When I was yet a child, before I was 12 years old, I felt this impression & this ardent affection to that calling; and that for this cause to instruct the people of God, and to show the way of life unto others, and not for the profit or preferment sake to be obtained thereby. That small patrimony & inheritance of free land which belonged unto me, I ever despised, & was content it should be otherwise disposed of for the comfort sake which I expected from this calling. And for these 38 years & upward, wherein I have already continued in the ministry, I am privy to myself that this desire hath remained in me even to this hour. And therefore how weak soever my labours have been, yet do I assure myself, that I have not been deluded with the vain title and shadow of a Minister. 2. Whatsoever inward desire I had to the work of the ministry yet I never sought the place of a Pastor, till I was lawfully called: did not intrude nor thrust in myself for a Pastor; neither did I ru● before I was sent. I went not to fill up the place of a Pastor upon disordered sending for by some particular person without knowledge of the rest, but waited for an orderly election, and call by th● free consent of the congregation. This assurance of a lawful calling is a shield of comfort against many encumbrances & troubles whic● do attend upon the ministry of the word. 3. Being settled in this calling, I have not wanted a comfortable experience of God's blessing upon my labours. God that worketh by weak means, hath often showed his grace and power in my great weakness. I will not speak further hereof what I justly might, nor show the ample testimony which formerly hath been given unto me in other places. Only yet let me remember the testimony of sundry these my opposites, and that at such time when they were offended with me, when there was controversy about Mr. Hooker. In their protestation carried to the Classis by 2 Elders, 2 Deacons, and 2 members of the Church in the name of diverse others. In that writing they testify thus much; for so much as concerns Mr. Paget our teacher, we acknowledge that his life and doctrine is such, that (without flattery it is spoken) we can have no better, who hath continued with us now 20 years and more, and hath obtained great praise with us, and with all that know him. And this was written in the name of the Consistory and of the members of the Church. 4. Whatsoever troubles have befallen me in this calling; whatsoever dangers I have undergone for testifying against the corruptions of the times and places where I lived; yet did I never voluntarily desert or forsake that work of ministry which was committed unto me. The fear of persecution hath not caused me to make a resignation of my place, nor to look back when I had put my hand to this plough of the Lord. And my resolution still is by the grace of God to cleave unto Christ, to take up his cross and to follow him; and so long as it pleaseth the Lord to grant me life, strength and liberty, to serve him in the Gospel of his Son, to preach the glad tidings of salvation unto the contrite, and to call men from the paths of error and destruction. Whereas these importunate complainants do tell us further in this writing, that they do by these presents testify unto all men, etc. Though this their writing be vile and most unworthy to be published unto a few, much less unto all men: yet seeing the matters of these complaints are already for the most part spread far & near, before this their writing was made, I am therefore content to join with them therein, desiring that this my Apology or Answer may go as far, for the satisfaction of all men, to whom either these their presents shall come, or their other former reproaches have already come. Whereas they add that they testify this, principally to the Elders of this Church, it is no marvel that they should dedicated this their writing unto them, seeing some of these Elders are parties with them, and that in diverse points as is after to be showed: Neither can I give a full answer unto this their writing in sundry particulars thereof, but that I am to reprove the Elders as well as them. Those to whom I principally intent this answer, are such as be abused with untrue and unjust complaints already blazed in so many places; and among these I suppose, are diverse of these complainants themselves, who being misled by others without due consideration of that which they have done, by the help of this my answer may come to the sight of their error and wrong done unto me. But leaving their preamble and general proposition, let us now come to the particulars, whereby they would prove that I do not behave myself as becometh a Pastor, neither in government nor doctrine. complainants. SECTION IU. THat he doth it not in government, will appear in these particulars. First he depriveth the Church of that liberty and power which Christ hath given it in the free choice of their Pastor, contrary to Act. 6. v. 3. & 14. v. 23. ANSWER. FIrst of all, it is to be observed that in this heinous accusation they do not only accuse me, but the Ministers of these Reformed Churches also, and specially those to whom we are nearest united in this Classis, under which we stand, whose order and practise in the choice of Ministers I do for my part labour to follow so near as I can: & therefore through my sides they wound a multitude of others. Yea the persons themselves are not so much taxed hereby, as the very government & order of discipline established in these Churches. It is untrue which they say, that I deprive the Church of her power: if the Church be spoilt of the power that Christ gave, this is not to be imputed unto me, seeing this order was here in these Countries established before my coming unto them: neither is it in my power to altar & change the form of their government. Secondly, behold the partiality of this accusation. The order observed among us in the choice of Minister, Elders and Deacons is that practice wherein the whole Eldership together with the Deacons have had their hand jointly so well as I. If the order observed be unlawful and contrary to Act. 6. & 14. then are they guilty of those disorders & defiled with the transgression of those Scriptures as well as I; seeing they have still joined with me in such elections. And how unreasonable a thing is this, that the blame of such a proceeding which is common to many should be laid upon me alone? Thirdly, suppose they had indifferently accused the whole Eldership together with me for depriving the Church of her power, yet what is the reason that they never framed such an accusation & protestation before this present; seeing this practice hath continued among us from time to time so many years, even to the last election of Elders and Deacons this last year, against which no such exception was made? why have they slept so long, and who hath wakened them at this present? How have they been meet partakers of the Lords Supper, and preserved themselves from partaking in other men's sins according to their former pretence, while they have not sought reformation of this imagined evil? I leave it to their own consciences to consider, whether now also they would not have kept silence, if they could have brought in Mr. Davenport even according to this corrupt order used by us as they complain of it. Fourthly, To come nearer unto the consideration of these places, Act. 6.3. & 14.23. I acknowledge (as I have also diverse times publicly taught in the exposition of these 2 places) that the free consent of the people is required unto the lawful calling of a Minister: neither is the same denied or excluded in our practice. The Synods of these reformed Churches describing the order to be observed in the calling of Ministers, do require a choice to be made by the Elders and Deacons, approbation of the Magistrates, allowance of the Classis, & in the last place consent of the Congregation, before whom the names of the persons called are publicly propounded from the Pulpit diverse Lords days, that they may take knowledge of the matter & witness their consent or descent as they shall find occasion. This is the order of these Churches & this is our practice, and therefore it is a false accusation of such as affirm the people to be deprived of their power hereby. Fiftly, whereas some object from Act. 6.3. that the people aught to go before in seeking out officers for themselves, that is the question to be examined by us. To this end it is to be considered, 1. That the Scripture makes no mention of either teaching or ruling Elders ordained at that time when the Deacons were first chosen Act. 6. If there were at that time no Elders, how could they then go before the rest, as now they may do in those places where they are? 2. If there were no Elders then, yet the Apostles that were then present may justly be accounted precedents going before the people in that action in stead of ordinary Elders. For though the multitude of disciples being many thousands at that time, be spoken unto for seeking out of Deacons, yet is not the precedency of the Apostles excluded thereby, and it is partly expressed, in that they prescribed both the thing to be done, the number of persons to be elected, and the quality of them. 3. Suppose the Apostles had wholly withdrawn themselves from that business of nomination and election of Deacons, yet were there many excellent men full of the Holy Ghost at that time; such as had been the Disciples of Christ before his death; such as had received extraordinary gifts of the Spirit; such as Barsabas, Barnabas, Stephen and others, who then in all reason were to go before the rest in guiding the action in stead of Elders; according to that * Numb. 8.9.10. example in the Scriptures, where that is ascribed unto the Congregation, which of necessity was to be performed by some chief persons going before the rest with their consent. 4. That other place, Actor. 14.23. where the act of electing is attributed unto Paul and Barnabas, although the consent of the people be showed thereby, yet doth it withal imply such an order, that they went before others as leaders therein. That one * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. original word of electing applied unto those two persons, doth import a double power of assent in the people; of precedency and presidency in Paul & Barnabas. 5. The titles of * Heb. 13.17. 1. Cor. 12.28. Rom. 12.8. 1. Tim. 5.17. guides, of governor's, of foregoers, of forestanders, which the Scripture in other places giveth unto Ministers and Elders, do likewise show, that they were to go before the Church in all the public actions thereof, and consequently in elections. Sixthly, unless the meaning of that place Act. 6.3. be thus explained & determined by conference with other Scriptures, men might hence take occasion to run into such uncouth absurdities as by the relation of one of these complainants, were committed in his presence at the confirmation of a certain English Minister in these countries, where the women being required & called upon to that end, did lift up their hands for testimony of their consent in calling him to be their Minister. For it is said that the * Act. 6.2.3 multitude of Disciples were called together about the election of Deacons, and required to look out fit persons for that office; and † Act. 6.7. with Act. 9.36. women being in the Scripture called Disciples & reckoned among them, might hereby seem to have a hand allowed them in this work, save that in * 1. Tim. 2.12. other places there is a restraint to exclude them from such acts of power, whereby they might oversway the voices of men. And as for the title of brethren, Act. 6.3. that would not easily have cleared the matter, seeing under that * Rom. 12.1. 1. Cor. 5.11. & 6.6. title the Holy Ghost useth to speak unto women as well as unto men. Thus also might that infamous and scandalous action of T.F. & E.S. in going about to houses, gathering and writing down the names of such women and maids as gave not their consent to the calling of Mr. B. obtain some colour of defence to the great disturbance of Churches, if those things that are spoken generally and indefinitely in one place, did not receyve a limitation and determination of order from other places. Seventhly, if these complainants were each of them apart well examined touching the due order of elections, and touching the ground thereof from these places Act. 6. & 14. I do assure myself that very few of them would be found to agreed with one an other. It is very probable that they neither understand themselves, nor one an other, but are carried blindly & inconsiderately in these great and important charges. A notable evidence hereof we have had already about the gathering of the names of women & maids by T.E. & E.S. to oppose the election of Mr. B. for at that time when many of the thief of these complainants, jun. 25. 1633. viz. T.F.A.H.I.C.H.D.I.S.D.B. I.P.H.P. & others, came together to the consistory, at that time, there was this remarkable dissension and difference among them, in three kinds. Some of them acknowledged that they did not allow that women should have voices in the election of Ministers: Some of them professed they could not tell what to judge thereof: Some of them in defence thereof alleged the judgement and practice of certain Ministers for the consent of women. Might not this example have brought them to some feeling of their ignorance & vanity, and have made them to abstain from such peremptory charges & accusations, as they have now presumed to make in this their writing? Lastly to deprive the Church of that liberty and power which Christ hath given it in the free choice of Ministers, must needs be an heinous crime & no less than sacrilege. And the guilt thereof doth involve not only the principal agent, but all that are any way accessary thereunto, even those that receive a calling from a Church, wanting that power which Christ hath given & ordained for the calling of officers. Now if their accusation be true, concerning the enthralled estate of our Church deprived of their power & liberty by me, then see how these blind accusers, not to speak of others among us, do enwrap not only other Elders and fellow Deacons, but themselves also in the sacrilegious crime of entering into their callings, not by the right door of a free choice according to Act. 6. & 14. but by a backdore or postern of unlawful intrusion without free consent of people, which they say is wanting among us. For both W. B. formerly & L.C. now presently a Deacon, have received their office by no other order, than this which I defend and they accuse. If I be guilty of robbing the Church of her power, these also must be thiefs in receiving that which I stole. Neither can it help them to say, that their accusation is about the choice of a Pastor, seeing Christ hath appointed but one order for the choice both of Pastor & Deacon. And the place alleged by themselves Act. 6. speaks more expressly and immediately of Deacons then of Pastor. Thus the heat of their fiery contention is so vehement, that it burns themselves; as once the mighty men of Babel were consumed by the flame of that fiery furnace, Dan. 3.20.22. into which they cast the servants and martyrs of the Lord. But let us again harken what further proof they bring, to show that I deprive the Church of that power which Christ gave unto it, etc. complainants. SECT. V THis we prove by his rejecting & opposing the most worthy servants of God (who came out of England for the same cause he did) whom the Church with one consent desired, as Mr. Hooker, and Mr. Davenport of later times, and also Mr. Parker, Dr. Ames, Mr. Forbes, Mr. Peter, etc. ANSWER. THis complaint is confirmed & aggravated by Mr. Davenport, when in his writing he saith of our Church, that had not he exercised much patience and industry, it would certainly have fallen from me, being overburthened with the loss of so many men so much desired by the Congregation, etc. These complainants entitle themselves the burdened members, he entitles them the overburdened; & makes their burden so great, that had it not been for him, they would certainly have been broken and fallen from me. May not these complainants think that they have great cause to put up Articles of grievance, and to complain of their burden in that very thing wherein he tells them they are overburthened? What wonder if they follow when they are so led forth, and by such a grave leader? The vanity of Mr. Davenport in this speech is upon other occasion further showed hereafter. I will now for the present turn me to those complainants, and in their reproof Mr. Davenport may in part read his own. For the more general assertions, I answer 1. Though I and these above mentioned do all agreed in dislike of some corruptions, against which we have testified, yet it cannot be showed that all came out of England for the same cause. Each might have their peculiar reason for that. 2. It is untrue and cannot be proved, that the Church with one consent desired each of these persons that are here named for instances, especially after their opinions were once known. 3. What wonder is it that I should oppose some of the persons here named, when each of themselves were opposite one to another? Mr. Davenport both by his own confession unto me, and in part by testimony of others, is or was opposite to Mr. Hooker touching the admission of Brownists to be members of our Church, while they persisted in their separation from the Church of England, touching private men's preaching, touching repentance going before faith, etc. Mr. Forbes was mainly opposite to Mr. Hooker touching the authority & use of Synods & Classes. Mr. Parker and Dr. Ames were opposite to Mr. Forbes touching the authority of Magistrates in Ecclesiastical causes. Mr. Forbes having printed a book touching Adoption going before justification, and touching the active obedience of Christ in the point of justification, Dr. Ames hath in print also declared himself opposite unto him in both those points of doctrine. Mr. Peter hath by his practice declared his judgement, that it is lawful to communicate with the Brownists in their worship, & by his example hath strengthened diverse members of our Church therein, such as sundry of these complainants are, already too much addicted to resort unto the assembly of schismatiqs & to hear them: but Mr. Davenport hitherto hath showed himself opposite to Mr. Peter's herein, etc. 4. Suppose that many worthy and eminent men do come out of their country for the same cause; this hinders not, but that there may be in the same eminent persons diverse eminent offences and errors, which may be just cause of opposing them, and refusing them as unfit Ministers for some particular congregations, when there may be profitable use of their labours in some other place of employment. Mr. Hooker said well in this, that every key is not fit for every lock, though both the metal and the make thereof be good. 5. Though either I or any other man do at any time refuse to give our voices for the calling of some persons, and do oppose the election of them, is this to deprive the Church of her power? cannot I use mine own liberty in declaring what I judge best for the Church, without destroying the liberty of another? Or if I conceive things to be unjustly carried & swayed against me in the Church or Consistory, and do therefore bring the matter to a higher lawful judicatory as the Classis or Synod, that they may judge betwixt us, and determine what is most for the edification of the Church, this doth not prove that I deprive the Church of that liberty and power which Christ hath given unto it. This is the point that aught to be proved: this is the 〈…〉 ●d be insisted upon. For this these accusers bring nothing but a mere assertion, nothing but their bore word, which is far from a proof, far from convincing their parties to be obstinate in sin. 6. Have not diverse of these complainants also showed themselves opposite & averse to the calling or sundry worthy servants of God, both godly & learned, which have preached among us, whose names I spare to mention? Are they therefore such as deprive the Church of her power? To come nearer unto the persons mentioned by them, such as were refused were not by my authority put back, but some of them by authority of the Magistrate, as Mr. Parker; or of the Classis, as Mr. Hooker; or of the Consistory in not consenting and agreeing to call them, as Mr. Forbes & Mr. Peter; or by their own voluntary desistance as Mr. Davenport, to avoid the violent rejection by the Classis, as he himself speaks: Though the authority of the Magistrate did afterwards further restrain us from seeking again either Mr. Hooker or Mr. Davenport. To come yet more particularly unto the several persons that are here objected by them. First for Mr. Hooker, his opinions being made known unto the Classis from his own handwriting, that was translated and showed unto them, Anno 1631 Octob. 6. the Classical assembly did thereupon judge, that he could not with edification be allowed hereafter to preach in the English Church of this City. And as for my dealing in that business, they judged also, as appeareth in the same act & sentence of the Classis, that I had therein proceeded according to a good conscience in every point, and had not done otherwise then the care which I own unto the Church did require, and therefore for the same aught to be thanked, and not accused or rebuked as having done evil, etc. And afterwards notwithstanding all opposition made against this act, the Classis still maintained & confirmed the same. And when the knowledge of this controversy did at length come unto the Synod, Anno 1632 Septemb. 7. the deputies thereof together with the deputies of the Classis, did in like manner judge, that a person standing in such opinions as were in writing showed unto the Classis, could not with any edification be admitted to the ministry of the English Church at Amsterdam. Had these complainants been wise & considerate persons, they would rather have sought to bury the memory of these things, then by their importunate complaints to compel me in 〈◊〉 own defence, to writ these things which otherwise I should not have done. For Mr. Davenport, let Mr. Davenport himself answer for me, though he do it grudgingly & with a very evil will; for in the midst of his complaints against me, though he seek to lay blame upon me in the beginning, middle and end or his writing; yet in his postscript, after his letter to the Classis, breaking out into complaints against the Classis, he lays upon them the blame of his rejection, tells how they seemed to be offended at his writing, and threatened to complain to the Magistrates; and further he saith, after much debate they concluded that I should have but a month's time, in which if I did not answer categorically that I would conform to the orders and customs of the Dutch Church, and to this particularly in question resting in the judgement & resolution of the 5 Dutch Preachers, & join with the Classis, or voluntarily desist, they would complain to the Magistrates, etc. What remained now to be done but either voluntary desistance on my part, or violent rejection on theirs? Now although there be in this postscript sundry faults & an injurious relation of matters to be further examined hereafter; yet thus much may hence appear, that it was the conclusion of the Classis which caused Mr. Davenport to desist; that they disliked his opinions as well or more than I; and that they thought him not a fit Minister for us in that course of his dissension from us. And why then have not these men directed their grievances and complaints of opposing and rejecting Mr. Davenport rather against the Classis then against me. And how is it, that they are not ashamed afterwards to writ and say, we conceive Mr. Paget the only cause we are deprived of such heavenly means for our edification? Herein Mr. Davenport plainly contradicteth them, confessing the Classis to be so strong a cause thereof. And those that are indifferent judges, may easily perceive how unjustly they lay this complaint upon me. But of Mr. Davenports calling more hereafter. For Mr. Parker, I answer, 1. Though there was some difference in the manner of proceeding about his call, yet did I not reject him, or oppose his calling. But this I did; I propounded the matter unto the Dutch Ministers, who made some difficulty about it. When Mr. Halius & Mr. Plancius two ancient Ministers, were deputed to deal with us hereabout, I laboured to clear the difficulties objected by them. Somewhile after a Dutch Minister and an Elder coming to Mr. Thomson, signified from the Burgemaisters of this City, Anno 1613 that they desired to keep friendship with his Majesty of Great Britain, that therefore we should surcease from the pursuit of this business. Beside other evidence, I have a copy of that letter, which our Eldership sent unto Mr. Parker, subscribed not only by me, but by Mr. A. and Mr. T. then our Elders, which may serve for confirmation hereof. And there be some ancient Ministers of the Classis yet living, whose testimony may give further light hereunto. But I spare to speak of many things too long to be related, which might be of use for reproof of this slander. 2. It is yet to be observed, how to make up their accusation against me, they rake into this business that fell out above 20 years past. If the affairs of these complainants & their dealings for 20 years together, were called to remembrance, what complaints might be found against many of them. For Dr. Ames, 1. I do not remember that ever his name was propounded in the Eldership, so as that voices were asked & gathered; neither is there any evidence in the acts of our Consistory, that either such a proposition or motion was made for him, much less of any agreement or resolution to call him. Only this I remember, that one ask me occasionally in discourse of him, I signified so much that I thought him not fit for us, neither could I give my consent for him. A special reason of my judgement was this, that * Puritanismus Anglicanus, c. 2. art. 3. & 6. edit. Latin. Anno 1610 he denied the authority of Synods and Classis. For howsoever I acknowledge, he hath written diverse learned & worthy treatises of much good use for the Church of God, and many do justly rejoice and give thanks for his labours: Yet this opinion and practice according to it, could not choose but procure (in my judgement) great confusion & disturbance of Churches. And how then could I, or any that so judgeth, willingly entertain such an occasion of contention & scandal? Against this opinion of his, I have earnestly contested with him, ever since I was acquainted with him. And howsoever in some of his later writings he hath set down his opinion more obscurely and covertly, yet finding that he persisted therein, I had no reason to seek such an assistant in government. 2. And besides this, (not to speak of other things) he was generally held to be a man fit to be a Professor of Divinity in the Schools, and that his gift was rather Doctoral than Pastoral. And when he left his profession in the University, it was generally disliked of all learned men (so far as I could hear) throughout these countries, none that approved him therein. Such also as were supposed to be occasion of his removal, were much blamed for it; and had I done it, I should have borne a blame even for this also; for calling him from the Academy, where the Curateurs were so unwilling to leave him. Anno 1610 For Mr. Forbes, About some 24 years past, there was a motion of calling him to be Minister among us. One cause of stay was this: He being banished out of Scotland, because of the Declinatour or appeal, which he & some others made from certain civil judges unto the general Assembly or Synod, as only judge competent in such an Ecclesiastical cause as was in question; Hereupon arose some question betwixt us, I thinking such an appeal to be unlawful, and he on the other side not only sought to maintain it, but avouched also that the oath of supremacy touching the Prince's power in Ecclesiastical causes, which the Ministers of England, whether conformists or non-conformists do all take, was an unlawful oath. Upon this I was moved to enter into a more serious consideration, both of his appeal & of my own oath, & desired of Mr. Forbes that there might be a meeting of Ministers for the hearing of this difference, offering to show unto him before them the unlawfulness of his Appeal. But this offer he absolutely refused: and hereupon not only I, but all our Elders with one consent, seeing he refused to give us satisfaction, did also refuse to proceed in the calling of him. And was this my offence? was it to deprive the Church of that power which Christ gave unto it? For Mr. Peter, Though at his first coming I gave some way and opposed not such as sought to have him here: Yet after some time of his continuance in the country, when he was called, and confirmed for Pastor of the English Church at Rotterdam; when after this a new proportion was again made for calling him hither, I acknowledge that I did not consent unto it. And I think it needles to give a reason here, why I gave not my voice for him: but I do yet think it needful to inquire of these complainants these 2 things; 1. Who be their witnesses of my opposing Mr. Peter, for hereby it seems that some sitting among us, have unlawfully divulged this, which aught to have been concealed, and that this accusation is framed from the suggestions of such as it lest becometh. 2. This also would be demanded of them, why their complaint is so partially directed against me alone, seeing there were others in the Consistory besides me, which did likewise oppose the election of Mr. Peter, and refused to give their voice for him, and so were as much guilty of robbing and depriving the Church of her power as I. But let us hear their further proof. complainants. SECTION VI. SEcondly by his pressing others upon the Congregation, abusing his interest in the Magistrates & Classis to that purpose, to the unspeakable injury and grief of the Church, in which course he hath prevailed so far as to procure that none of our own nation that come immediately from England, though never so fit & able shall be admitted, but we must be forced to take one that can speak Dutch, and one in this country: though the Lord hath fought against his course hitherto by the great unfitness of those, who have preached here by his nomination or consent in sending for. ANSWER. OUr Saviour teacheth us in doing good, to give good measure, Luk. 6.38. pressed down, shaken together, and running over. In stead hereof these accusers in doing evil unto me, fill an Ephah with slanders; hereof they give a large measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running over, as appeareth in this section. 1. It is a slander that I press others upon the Congregation; seeing in this act of election I use no power, but of giving my voice or suffrage as the rest do: other authority I do not arrogate unto myself: I do not claim unto myself any more than one voice. Every Elder & Deacon hath in like manner a voice as well as I, in the free choice of Ministers or other officers. If they conceive any error to be committed in the election, they have equal liberty and power to seek redress by the same ordinary & lawful means as well as I. 2. It is an other vile slander, when they say, I abuse my interest in the Magistrates & Classis to that purpose. It had been requisite that these accusers should have brought their witnesses for proof of this charge. But lo in stead of proof we have nothing but their bareword, which is not to be admitted. 3. It is a further slander, pressed down in their measure, which doubles their guiltiness, in that they spare not to involve the Magistrates in the same crime with me. If I procure them & prevail so far with them, that the Church be thereby deprived of that liberty and power that Christ hath given it, for the free choice of a Minister, to which purpose this is alleged; then are the Magistrates also guilty in suffering themselves to be abused and corrupted by me or others for me: and this not in a small matter, but in sacrilege and. Church-robbery, in taking away that power which Christ gave. Thus to make me a deceaver, they make them Tyrants, and so that they may wound me, they care not to shoot them thorough also with the arrows of their slander. 4. Their slander is yet the greater & the measure thereof shaken together, when they extend it unto the Classis also, unto the faithful and godly Ministers, both in the City and Country adjoining thereunto, as if they were generally so blind and corrupt as to suffer themselves to be abused by me, and to be carried away even unto sacrilege also to deprive the Church of her liberty & power. So that they may fall upon me, they spare neither Civil nor Ecclesiastical estate, they neither honour Magistrates nor reverence Ministers. That they may make me vile and filthy, it is here evident, that they spare not to cast the mire and dirt of their reproaches into the faces of principal men, both in Church and commonwealth. Who would think that W.B. I.Po. T.Fl. Th. Fa. I.Cr. and their fellows should exalt themselves to such a height of pride in bold slandering? I.S. in special being a publiq Notary, whose work is to writ down the testimony of witnesses, and aught to know that matters are thereby confirmed; how is it that he sets his hand unto such a slanderous accusation, both of Magistrates & Classis abused by me, and led unto so great sacrilege, and this without pregnant witness, or if they have sufficient witness, why did they never bring the same unto me for my conviction before this time? 5. It is to be observed how in the mids of their slander, their very reproach itself serves to the clearing of me; for if I have such interest both in the Magistrates & Ministers of the Classis, and can so much prevail with both, as they here do writ; may not those that are unpartial, and wise in heart conceive hereby, that I have obtained this interest in them, not by abusing & corrupting them, but rather by walking uprightly before them, and approving my ways in their sight? 6. That which the Magistrates have done is this: After the departure of Mr. Hooker, calling for me & two of our Elders, and exhorting us to proceed without delays unto the choice of such a Minister as should accord with the Classis, they required also that if it were possible, such an one should be called which could speak dutch, giving this double reason thereof; that both he might be fit to sit in the Classis where the affairs of the Church are debated in the Dutch tongue, and that he might be the mouth of the Church unto the Magistrates upon occasion as necessity should require in those things that were to be treated of with them. And since also they have required that we should choose one out of these countries near unto us, rather than to sand into England for one, giving likewise this double reason thereof; that both they might better inform themselves touching the state of the Minister that was to be allowed by them; and because it would be a greater repulse & trouble unto the Minister, sent for so far out of England, if it should fall out that they did not like him nor admit of him. Let reasonable men judge whether there be such abuse, and such unspeakable injury as these accusers complain of, upon this act of the Magistrates: especially considering that a Minister called unto this place, which cannot speak Dutch, is in great measure no better than a dumb Minister in respect of one special work of his calling, which is to give advice for the greatest difficulties in the government of these Churches, in the ordinary meetings of the Classis. 7. Notwithstanding this charge given by the Magistrates, yet when Mr. Davenport was come out of England, although not lawfully sent for, though he could not speak Dutch, yet when there was hope of his accord with us, upon intercession of the Dutch Ministers, who were informed that he agreed with them, the gentleness and equanimity of the Magistrates was such, that they were content to dispense with his want of the Dutch language, and for supply of our necessity to allow of him. But finding after that they were deceived in him, that he did not rest in the advice of their Ministers, and that great contention was thereupon raised among us, what wonder if they renewed their charge more strictly than before? Lastly, behold here the greatest slander of all, and the measure of their slander running over; whiles in their rash judgement and sinful taking of the name of God in vain, they make him a party & an adversary against me, by affirming that the Lord hath fought against my course hitherto, etc. for whosoever in their unjust contentions do make the Lord an enemy where he is not, and to fight against such as he doth not, they do reproach the Lord himself, and lay iniquity upon the Lord, making him a partaker with them for maintenance of their sin. Their proof that the Lord hath fought against me, is from the great unfitness of those who have preached here by my nomination or consent in sending for. But this main proof is many ways to their own just reproof. The first that preached here by my consent in sending for him, though not by my nomination was Mr. Balmford, and this after the charge given by the Magistrates. His great unfitness is their great slander that avouch it, unless they could prove it. How some of these complainants fought against his calling is notorious through the country, to the shame and reproach of our Church. The next that preached here by my consent in sending for, together with consent of the Eldership, is a man endued with special gifts of learning, piety and utterance, adorned with the testimony of worthy men in those parts where he lived; and it is another notable slander to speak of his great unfitness. Such reproaches are quickly broached, but the guilt of them is not so quickly and easily taken away. The next that preached here, for whom I have borne many reproaches, before this accusation was written, is a man also of special note for his learning and labours in the Church of God, and much commended unto us by diverse men of esteem. Howbeit there was none that made so much scruple in sending for him as I did; neither did I at all give my voice unto him, but being overswayed by voices, I yielded at their desire to writ unto him in the name of the Elders and Deacons, and subscribed it as a witness of that which the Eldership desired, which was only to hear him and to take trial of his gifts. It may here be observed what double & triple injury is done unto me in this business, 1. how unjustly I am dealt withal by them that tell abroad, and that so falsely the things that are done in the Consistoty. 2. How partially I alone am blamed for that which others did, and I lest of all contented unto. 3. How unjustly I am blamed for that, which is absolutely lawful, namely to take trial of men's gifts, knowledge and utterance, howsoever they prove upon trial; for he had no calling, but was only sent for that we might hear him & confer with him. How ill advised then have these complainants been, upon so weak a foundation to build so heinous an accusation that God hath fought against me? I may better say with the Psalmist, Be merciful unto me, O God, Psal. 56.1. for man would swallow me up, he fighteth daily and oppresseth me. Neither am I fought against by these complainants only, but Mr. Davenport also fighteth against me in like manner, when to prove that I did not desire him here, he allegeth this reason in end of his third writing: because he hath always so much urged to have one that hath lived some years in this country, and hath hitherto opposed diverse worthy men that have come immediately from England, my hope is at an end & I must rest. The answer before given unto the complainants, may also serve for answer to Mr. Davenport. Only in this Mr. Davenport overlasheth more than they; and his assertion hath more untruth in it then theirs, when he saith, I have always so much urged to have one that hath been some years in this country, etc. for I never urged this, till the Magistrates urged us to have consideration hereof: and they never urged it till of later time; it was not urged till after Mr. Hooker, and therefore the ignorance of the Dutch tongue was not alleged as any hindrance either of Mr. Hookers calling, or of any other nominated before his time. Here through the importunity of Mr. Davenport breaking in upon me, I shall a while leave these complainants, and make a necessary digression for the declaration of such things as have been occasion of the strife raised up in this place. The Story of some proceed about the calling of Mr. DAVENPORT. The occasion of writing this Story. SECTION VII. WHiles I was busy in writing down my answer unto these complaints, it is given me to understand, that an other complaint is written against me by Mr. Davenport, and secretly dispersed among our people. Having gotten a copy thereof, I find that he hath dealt very injuriously with me, not only in misreporting many things, but in sundry unjust inferences and reasonings which he makes thereupon. I find also that most of his complaints are for the substance of them, the very same that these complainants have framed against me, as if they and he had spoken out of one mouth, or as if the same pen had written both. His writing is threefold, and each of them hath his name subscribed. The first is his Letter written to the Classis, translated out of Latin into English: The second an instruction given unto some of our Elders: The third is a new addition unto the former, both against me and the Classis also. Each of these three writings are stained with untruth, and matter of reproach, and are fit to kindle contention in our Church, and to harden these complainants in their unjust opposition, not against me only, but against the Classis and the governor's of these Churches; which is a very evil office, and far unbeseeming a Minister of the Gospel, and such an one as is so eminent & renowned in the Church of England. Therefore before I proceed further in the refutation of these complainants & their objections, I have thought it needful to set down a short story or narration touching the calling of Mr. Davenport, and the issue thereof, which may serve to give light unto this controversy, in stead of so many broken and false relations, which here and there are made to my prejudice, and serve to darken and obscure the truth. His two former writings for the full answer thereof, I do for this present leave unto the consideration of the Classis, unto whom they were given, to deal therein as shall be judged most convenient: For the third writing, I purpose now to answer it in every particular thereof; yet so as I shall take them in by the way, and insert them (as I have already begun) into that answer which I make unto these complainants, in such place and upon such occasion as I shall judge the fittest, seeing they all may be referred either unto this story, or unto one or other head of their complaints. Yea and for the matters of fact contained in his former writing to the Classis, because some of them are the very same which these complainants do object, therefore can I not altogether pass by them without some touch thereof. Of his disordered sending for out of England. Sect. VIII FIrst of all, such as procured the coming of Mr. Davenport out of England, did not according to good order communicate the matter with those whom it specially concerned, who in all such weighty and public affairs of the Church, should by their counsel and direction have gone before others therein. And Mr. Davenport himself had done more wisely, if before his coming he had consulted with us. Now notwithstanding this disorderly and unlawful manner of sending for, without my knowledge, and without the consent or knowledge of our Eldership; yet being come out of England, I made no exception hereat for the stay or hindrance of his calling. I desired him to preach and entered into deliberation how to accomplish his calling. But this Mr. Davenport in his third writing perverteth to show that I did not desire to have him, because (saith he) several times he shown his dislike of my coming hither without his desire, or consent in sending for me, though it is apparent that God sent me hither at a needful time, when without me they would have been destitute, he being unable to preach or to come unto the Church. Hereunto I answer, 1. He doth untruly and unjustly relate my speeches, by leaving out the special cause of my dislike: he speaks only of my desire & consent, which was wanting in his sending for; whereas I spoke how he was sent for without my knowledge, and without the knowledge or consent of our Eldership. And who sees not how great a difference there is betwixt my words and his misreport of them? If the matter had been communicated with the Eldership, and if his sending for had been allowed of the most, his coming over upon such a warrant, might have been lawful and just, though my desire or consent had been wanting, but to sand for him without my knowledge, and without either consent or knowledge of the Eldership, this was the thing I shown my dislike of. 2. When at several times upon occasion, I shown my dislike of the disordered course in sending for him, and yet in such manner, that at the same time I still shown withal, that this disorder should not hinder me from furthering his call, and that I would not take any exception thereat, if he did otherwise accord with us; this is a plain proof that I was willing enough to have him with us, and his contrary inference from hence is vain. 3. Though in regard of God's providence which extendeth itself unto all things, good or evil, Mr. Davenport might say he was sent of God in a needful time, when I was sick; yet this is no warrant or excuse at all for that disorder used in sending for him: for God oftentimes sendeth wicked men and wicked spirits in needful time, to accomplish his will, and to serve his providence, both for deliverance of his people and for punishment; and yet those wicked instruments that were so sent of God, are not excused thereby. Thus the * 1. Sam. 23 27.28. Philistines might be said to be sent of God in his providence in a needful time, to rescue David from Saul at S●la-hammalekoth, and yet no thanks to them that wanted lawful calling to invade the Israelites. 4. It is apparent that Mr. Davenport his not-comming in the needful time, was one special means of my sickness: for upon the report & expectation of his coming, there grew a neglect in time to provide other means for supply of my place the Lordsday before his coming, thereupon being frustrate of that expectation, rather than the place should be destitute, I strained myself above my power, not being fully recovered, and so the same evening of that day, I got a dangerous relapse, and my sickness was renewed through his occasion, whereby we were disappointed. Otherwise there was great appearance of my speedy recovery. This is that needful assistance, whereof there is further occasion to speak hereafter, where it is again boasted of, and I upbraided with it again, both by him & by these complainants also. Of Mr. DAVENPORT his resignation of his Pastoral charge in London. SECT. IX. HAving passed by this disorder of sending for him, there was also another difficulty, which I did not insist upon, as I might have done, if I had been so desirous to hinder his calling as he pretends; for though it be necessary that those which leave a Pastoral calling, should bring authentiq testimony of their lawful dimission, before they be admitted to take upon them the like charge in another place, yet neither did the want of this, 'cause me to make any delay in the calling of Mr. Davenport, as justly it might have done: but I accepted and rested in his own relation of the matter, though I confess it was something more for furtherance of his calling, than I aught to have done. I do the rather note this, because Mr. Davenport, to manifest that I never desired him, allegeth that before he came hither, when I heard he was to come over, I preached publicly against his resigning up of his place, etc. whereunto my answer is, 1. He complaineth unjustly against me for that which I did not. I had indeed preached upon those words of the Apostle; 2. Cor. 4.16 for this cause we faint not, but though our outward man perish, etc. and there among other instances of men's unlawful fainting in affliction, I reckoned that for one, when men through fear of danger and trouble do unlawfully leave their stations and flocks, and forsake the calling of God. jona. 1. jer. 20.9. I shown the danger hereof in the example of jonah fleeing from the presence of God, and from jeremy that was tempted thereunto, etc. But it doth not appear from hence, that I preached just against his resignation of his place, the manner whereof I knew not; no more than I intent to speak against the person of such or such a particular sinner, when I preach against the special sins that are common in the world. 2. Whereas he adds touching his resignation, that I afterwards justified it, when he related unto me the cause thereof, the carrying therein, and the consent of many worthy divines, and of the Congregation itself thereunto. The truth is, as I remember, that I did approve of diverse particular things, which he told me that he had done in that business, which I conceived to be so as he related, yet did I not therefore absolutely justify his resignation. 3. Herein appeared that I was willing enough to admit of him, in that I did not enter into a stricter examination of these two things; first of his evidence, to show that both these Divines and his Congregation did clearly consent unto his resignation; and secondly of the grounds whereupon they consented, which were needful to be known, with some other things also that belong unto so great and weighty a matter, as that was; especially considering that worthy Divines are sometimes mistaken in such questions, and justly corrected by others. 4. Suppose that I had preached against his resignation, yet would not this justify his collection from thence, namely, that I never desired him; for both before I heard of his resignation, and after again, if it had been as he faith, that I justified it upon his relation, he might then have conceived an alteration in me, and so not have concluded, that I never desired him. Of the knowledge which Mr. DAVENPORT had of our differences before his coming over unto us. SECT. X. Mr. Davenport before his coming into these Countries, had heard of our troubles and controversies, and he had heard of the occasion thereof; he knew what was required of Mr. Hooker, and saw in writing a copy of the differences between him and us, as both Mr. Davenport himself hath confessed and others have testified. He might well think that if he brought the same opinions with him unto us, he should thereby bring the like troubles, and revive & rekindle that fire that was quenched. If at his coming over he was of the same mind with us, how is be so suddenly changed? If he was not of the same mind with us, what meant he to come over to disturb our peace? If he came with a discordant mind, what could he expect but new contentions, rents & schisms about those things, which he knew had occasioned so great disturbance before? Mr. Davenports excuse touching his knowledge and sight of the questions proposed unto Mr. Hooker, is that he saw the questions in London above a year before his coming over, when he was far from any thoughts of coming to Amsterdam, or to any place out of his own Land. But if he saw them so long before, he had the more time to deliberate ripely. If he either forgot them, or lost the writing which was communicated with him, he had opportunity and means enough to have got them again. And when he was by some particular friends moved to come hither, had he not then just occasion to have considered the state of these Churches, before he came over to disturb their peace by his opposition and contrariety unto them? When his thoughts of coming to Amsterdam did arise with in him, aught not this care to have risen up in his heart together, to consider our estate and his own disposition for agreement with us, lest he should add fuel to that flame of contention, the light whereof hath been seen so far of. He answereth further, And when he did come over, he purposed both in England and here, that he came but for 3 or 4 months, for which time what need was there of knowing, much less practising or conforming to the Dutch Churches? But he aught to have considered better, 1. For a man of plausible gifts, eminent, and of fame, and wanting present employment, to present himself where a place is vacant, where much contention hath been about that place, though he offer to stay but for 3 of 4 months; who sees not that such an one doth manifestly give occasion of seeking him and calling him unto that place? Divers learned and godly Ministers being our neighbours in this Country, have been loath to show themselves in this place, and notwithstanding their just occasions of coming hither, have willingly absented themselves a longer time, lest they should seem to offer themselves unto this calling: such was their modesty and care to avoid all appearance of intrusion. Mr. Hooker also though sent for by a private man, yet being come over to Rotterdam, yet there he stopped and stayed himself, and was not willing to come hither, before he had been sent for by our Eldership. 2. Such as secretly sent for Mr. Davenport, and I.C. that fetched him over, did they seek him but for 3 or 4 months? The friend which by an open and unsealed letter, which Mr. Davenport himself brought unto me from London, entreated me to receive Mr. Davenport for a fellow-helper, did not desire that for 3 or 4 months only. 3. Was it likely that after 3 or 4 months preaching among us, he could easily be dismissed? And must not our labour and care of seeking and calling another Minister, be interrupted for that time, if not wholly broken off? 4. Suppose he purposed to stay but 3 or 4 months only, yet even for that time it was needful for him to know the state of the Dutch Churches, and of ours with them, there being such controversies raised as he had heard of, and to that end to inform himself by inquiry, that being come unto us, he might so much the better have applied himself to do good. For seeing a good conscience suffers not a man to be neutral, nor to suspend his judgement, when it is seriously desired, but forceth him to bear witness unto the truth, when it is called into question, in those things which he esteemeth to be necessary and agreeable to the will of God; how dangerous then had it been for Mr. Davenport, not to be well informed of our estate, when the members of our Church should require his judgement for their satisfaction and help? In 3 or 4 months time a man might do more hurt even by his private conference, then in 7 years could be repaired again. 5. Suppose Mr. Davenport had never purposed to have come into these Countries, yet had it been very needful and useful for him, or any that desires the reformation of a Church in any Country, to know the state and practice of adjoining Reformed Churches, and that for their help in diverse present controversies, which help while some have neglected, they have dangerously stumbled and fallen to the great offence of many. Mr. Davenport answereth yet further and saith, When he did consider of that question (touching Baptism) as it was put to Mr. Hooker, there was not neither in the question nor answer sufficient light to inform him of that which time hath discovered herein, neither can any man from thence know what in this question is to be disliked. But on the contrary, many men from that question and answer might have known what was to be liked or disliked therein, neither is there such obscurity therein as is pretended. If Mr. Hooker had not understood it, as it was put unto him, he being then in these Countries, might easily have informed himself further, even the same day that it was propounded unto him. If Mr. Davenport doubted of the meaning, and if I C. one of these chief complainants, being sometime with him in London could not, yet the Ministers of the Dutch Church his neighbours in the same City, could easily have informed him: and if he had not found that sufficient, yet had it been ten times better for him to have waited for a letter of information from hence, either touching that or any other question, concerning the practice of these Churches, then to have raised such broils and contentions among us by coming over unresolved to agreed with us, and by bringing his dissension with him. Of the private conference had with Mr. DAVENPORT after he was come over unto us. SECT. XI. BEside the knowledge which Mr. Davenport had of our estate before his coming, I was willing to manifest the same further unto him after he was come to Amsterdam; and upon conference with him about such things wherein Mr. Hooker differed from us, to the great disturbance of our Church, he seemed unto me to accord with us, and to dislike the opinions of Mr. Hooker generally. The main or only difference which he persisted in for a long time, was about the baptism of infants, whose parents were no members of the Church, nor would submit unto any private examination by him, further than their public profession of faith before the whole Church. I shown him what scandal had risen among the Brownists by denying of Baptism to the infants of such as made profession of the same saith with us; how they had written and printed books against the Dutch and French Churches for this matter as well as others; how they had excommunicate Mr. Slade, for defending the practice of the Dutch here●●, how Mr. johnson, Pastor of the Brownists, began at length to see his error, and acknowledged his fault to Mr. Slade so wronged by them; how unworthy a thing it would be for us, to take up the error which some of the Brownists began to lay down; how the other Brownists would now a fresh insult against us; how some among us that were come from the Brownists, would be hardened in their error; and in sum how all the Church generally would take offence to see a double practice, and so different betwixt us, to see me ordinarily baptising those, whom he should refuse to baptism; to see him make a separation from me in the administration of Baptism, which was wont to be performed jointly by me, and my other fellow-minister, the one (whose course was to preach) declaring the institution of Baptism from the Pulpit, and the other sitting below to baptism the infant according to the manner of these Churches. I did also propound unto him some places of Scriptures, touching the examination of parents abovesayd, for the baptism of their children, and shown that when so great multitudes were at once baptised by john Baptist Mat. 3. Mark. 1. and by the Apostles Act. 2. there could not be a strict private examination of every particular person; by conference of other Scriptures their confession of their sins, and profession of faith, were rather to be conceived some solemn and public testification of their consent unto the Doctrine that was preached unto them, etc. but by such private conferences I prevailed nothing with him in this point. And in this place I have just occasion to answer the unjust complaint of Mr. Davenport for my no better usage of him. In his * Pag. 12. third writing as it is in the printed book, he pretendeth two special injuries, which I should do unto him: The first is, that I said and reported that I had often desired to dispute or confer with Mr. Davenport touching this point, but that he refused it, etc. Hereunto I answer, 1. It is untrue that I so reported; I know we did diverse times confer and talk together about this point, and I know that many others did know it well enough. But this I have said and reported diverse times; when after our conference together, some of these complainants came unto me, and spoke against me, and the Dutch Ministers, as if we had no word of God, but customs and examples of men for our practice, then upon such provocation (as hath been noted before, Sect. 3. ) I offered unto them, 〈…〉 Mr. Davenport would set down in writing any warrant from the Scripture for his opinion, I would then give him an answer in writing, etc. But though this was offered unto them sundry times, yet did none of them procure that the question should be in writing discussed betwixt us. 2. Whereas he saith, there passed 2 or 3 serious conferences between us, wherein this point was disputed, etc. I acknowledge that all our conferences were serious, because they were not in jest, but that there were any accurate or exact disputations betwixt us, as Mr. Davenport seems to say, that I deny. And for his part, I do not remember, that ever he propounded any argument in maintenance of his opinion, further than to make some exceptions upon occasion of that which I spoke. 3. Where he adds touching these conferences, that he hath them in writing by him; Herein I do complain of Mr. Davenport for want of sincere and plain dealing; that he should writ down my speeches, and the talk that passed between him and me, without my knowledge in such a stealing & secret fashion. It seems he came prepared so to speak, as that he would have his words written, which was far from my thought. I dreamt of no such underhand course, but discoursed as occasion was given in that time of my sickness, when this was done. Honest and upright dealing required that he should have acquainted me with his purpose, which had I known, I should have condescended unto a writing upon equal terms, as willingly as he. It was strange unto me, when I did first hear of this by one of our Elders that told me, how he had written down the passages betwixt us, when he departed home from me, and in my heart I loathed such his dealing, which here he is not ashamed to publish himself, saying that he hath these conferences in writing by him. Had he either given me leave to writ mine own words, and not like a deceitful Notary, to set them down at home in a corner as he thought best: or had he at lest shown me afterwards what he had written, to see whether I would have owned th●se speeches so covertly recorded by him behind the curtain, it might have been some part of amendss, though not sufficient. How can this m●n complain for want of brotherly love in others, and yet he so far from honest and ingenuous dealing himself? 4. The mis●●p●●t that Mr. Davenport hath already made of the private conference that 〈◊〉 between him and me, doth give me just cause of disclaiming and rejecting his apocryphal scripture, or hidden writing of his and my words. For in his first writing to the Classis, he offendeth both in excess and defect; both relating what was not spoken, and omitting that which was spoken, and needful to be known for the matter in hand. In setting down the conference about his examination of parents, he neither reports my question, nor his own answer rightly and truly. I demanded of him what measure of knowledge he would in his examination require in parents for the baptising of their children, which question is of great use for deciding of the controversy: but this my question is concealed, and another feigned in stead thereof. His answer to my question, which I often and plainly urged him withal, was not as he relates, which is also from the point, neither was it satisfactory, for he professed that measure of knowledge required, could not be declared till the time of examining the persons; that then he should judge thereof. In the same writing also he doth make a very defective relation of his answer and my question, about his consent unto the writing of the 5 Ministers, of which more hereafter. Hereby may be conceived what impartiality and sincerity we are to expect from his lurking notes of this conference. 5. Whereas he speaks of his not ceasing till I gave over; of my leaving it now to the Dutch Preachers; and that I would speak no more with him alone. Let the reader know, that I did not give over conference for fear of being convinced by any force of his arguments; but seeing little fruit of my talk with him, I desired him to confer with the Dutch Ministers, that could give him better satisfaction. Neither did I then say, that I would speak no more with him alone; but afterwards upon his refusal of the calling, when he came into the Church, and desired to speak with me alone from the rest of the Consistory; I required him to speak in their presence, and refused to confer with him alone about that matter, for fear my words should be perverted: and likewise when I first understood how his manner was to writ down my words, when he came home, I then professed unto diverse, that it was not safe for me to confer with him alone, unless witnesses were present. Th●●●saile of 5 Dutch 〈…〉 ●ting of Mr. DAVENPORT. SECT. XII. WHen I had in vain privately conferred with Mr. Davenport, to persuade him to accord with us; when as he still refused to join with me in that order of Administration of Baptism, wherein Mr. Pot had so long continued with me, I offered further that if any other convenient way of accommodation could be found out, I would willingly harken unto it. After this there came unto me Mr. Geldorpius, and signified unto me, that if I would sand for 40● 5 of the Dutch Ministers, and confer with them about the business of Mr. Davenport, for the accommodating thereof he thought they would willingly come unto me, but that they would not come unsent for; and if I would sand forthem, he would be the messenger. I thanked him for his offer, and accepted willingly his motion, praying him to go for them, which he also did. Hereupon there came unto me 5 of them, some of them being also requested thereunto by some of our Elders. Being come, after some conference & deliberation together, they found it good to set down their advice for accommodation in writing. The copy whereof, translated out of Latin into English, is as followeth. We the underwritten Ministers of the Dutch Church in the City of Amsterdam, being specially & lovingly requested and desired of the Reverend Mr. PAGET, a faithful Pastor in the English Church of the same City, as also of the Reverend Brethrens the Elders & Deacons of the same English Church, that we would not refuse sincerely to declare & show our private judgement about the calling of the Reverend, most famous and learned Mr. DAVENPORT, which seems to be desired of the whole Church aforesaid; and that in this particular case alone, concerning the Baptism of those infants, which are offered to be baptised in the English Church: Having well understood and duly weighed the whole matter on both sides, and having throughly examined it according to the rule of God's Word, and the order received in the Re●●●●●● 〈…〉 these Provinces, in which the aforesaid English Church doth profess itself a member under the Classis of Amsterdam: We do sincerely, and in the presence of God with good conscience answer and declare, that we desire nothing more, then that the foresaid Mr. DAVENPORT, whose notable learning & singular piety is very much approved and commended of all the English our Brethrens; whom also in this regard, and for his other commendable gifts, we understand to be most dear unto Mr. PAGET, may be lawfully promoted unto the ministry of the English Church aforesaid: We do also greatly approve of his good zeal and care of having some precedent private examination of the parents, and sureties of these children in the Christian Religion; Yet touching the matter itself we do so judge, that this foresaid examination be ordained so far as may stand with the edification of the English Church; but if happily the parents or sureties shall refuse to come and undergo this examination, or if for the shortness of time, or for other just causes it cannot be done, or if those that do come shall not seem for that time to satisfy the judgement of the Brethrens, one of mo●e that do examine them, that yet the infant, whose parents and sureties are manifest to be Christians, and which publicly before the Church do profess Christian Religion, at the reading of the liturgy of the Sacrament of Baptism, shall not therefore be excluded from Baptism, or deprived thereof; but that such ignorant parents and sureties, be further instructed after the infant be baptised, to wit, because the infants of Christians aught not to bear & suffer the punishment of the ignorance, or yet of such disobedience of their parents or sureties. If yet any other case fall out, whereby it may seem that the infant presented should not be baptised, that then the judgement of the whole English Presbytery, or also if 〈◊〉 be, and if conveniently it may be done, that the judgement of the Classis of Amsterdam be obtained and heard, and rested in. So was it done & transacted in the house of Mr. PAGET, the 28 day of januarij 1634. The subscription was joannes le Maire. jacobus Triglandus. Rudolphus Petri. jacobus Laurentius. H. Geldorpius. This their advice being thus written down and read before me, they enquired of me, whether I for my part did rest therein. I signified my consent with them, and so yielded unto the accommodation of Mr. Davenport, as far as they could in conscience desire of me. Hereby than it may appear, how vainly and unjustly Mr. Davenport doth report of me in each of his 3 writings. In his first * Book of complaints pag. 3.4. writing to the Classis, he tells how I dealt extremely with him, and rejected all his labour for a peaceable composing, prudent accommodating and brotherly ending of matters betwixt him and me privately, or by the counsel of the Elders of his own Church, nor would 〈◊〉 to his advice for accommodation without consent of the Classis. In his * Pag. 11. second writing the instruction given to some of the Elders, he reports that I would not yield any brotherly moderation unto him, etc. In his * Pag. 15. third writing, he reports that I refused all means of accommodation. All these reports are untruths. And this writing witnesseth for me; that I was willing to yield unto this peaceable composing and prudent accommodation, which these learned and prudent men at first without knowledge of the Classis, at the motion of their friend, at the entreaty of our Elders, and at my request did privately advice us unto, they protesting in the presence of God, that they dea● sincerely and with good conscience, desiring nothing more than to further the calling of Mr. Davenport among us. And is not this their solemn and conscionable protestation as much and much more to be regarded of me, than the imprudent and unbrotherly reports and complaints of Mr. Davenport? Of the order agreed upon in the Consistory also, for the accommodation of Mr. DAVENPORT. SECT. XIII. MOreover about the same time, before the writing of the 5 Ministers was communicated with Mr. Davenport, and before his consent thereunto was demanded, januar. 15. 1634. there was an order made in our Eldership, and concluded by consent both of Elders and myself, that the Coster or Keeper of our Church, should sand or bring unto Mr. Davenport such parents as came unto the Coster beforehand, to tell him of their children which they had to be baptised. And above this for enlarging of this order, and for further accommodation of Mr. Davenport, I voluntarily offered and promised to sand unto Mr. Davenport those parents which came unto me, to advertise me of their infants to be baptised, and so departing from my right & interest in that business, I was content to refer the whole work of examination unto his discretion, that so whether he or I declared the institution of Baptism from the Pulpit, as our course was to preach; whether he or I baptised the infants standing below when our course was not to preach, he might either way receive satisfaction by a precedent examination, so far as we could procure it from the parents. Of Mr. DAVENPORT his consenting unto the writing of the 5 Ministers, upon the order made in the Consistory. SECT. XIV. THis order abovesayd being made, and a copy of the 5 Ministers advice in writing, being brought unto Mr. Davenport; at our next meeting in the Church, after the second sermon was ended, I demanded of Mr. Davenport whether he rested in the counsel which the Ministers had given: And he than signified his consent both by Mr. W. to whom he referred us for answer; and partly by himself upon consideration of that order in the Consistory, which Mr. W. had told him of. Hereupon immediately even the same hour both Elders & Deacons assembling together in the Consistory, januar. 22. 1634. and Mr. W. witnessing that he consented, upon condition that the order taken by us in the Consistory might be observed, the consent of Mr. Davenport was then recorded, and upon that 〈…〉 it was presently resolved by us both to elect him for Minister, and to depute some to go unto the Magistrates to seek their approbation. But here Mr. Davenport steps in and complains of wrong; for here we have fit place to mention and insert that second special injury, Book of complaints pag. 12. & 13. which he saith I did unto him in reporting that he was gone from his promise, for that he said he would rest in the writing of the 5 Ministers, but now would not. He objecteth against me in the same place, and saith, I know that from the first to the last, myself never heard him speak any such word. Hereunto I answer, 1. Suppose that I myself had never heard him speak any such word; yet when as he upon my demand of his consent, did refer me for answer unto Mr. W. and said, he had given his answer unto him, I was then to take the answer of Mr. W. as if it had been his own word, and as if he himself had spoken it. If Mr. W. had spoken of himself without such warrant from Mr. Davenport, his word had been of less weight, but now referring me for his answer to Mr. W. he thereby gave authority both unto him to speak, and unto me to receive his testimony. 2. I went yet further, for though he had referred me for his answer unto Mr. W. yet I told him at the same time, that it was better that he should give his answer himself; whereupon he said (not as he reports in his letter to the Classis, Pag. 4. that the writers themselves did not require this of him,) but this he said, he thought the Dutch Ministers had done as much as they could, and so referred himself to that order of the Consistory, which Mr. W. had told him; and Mr. W. being present, said unto me, that I needed not to speak further unto him about it. 3. Whereas he saith further, that the night before they went to the Magistrates for their consent to his call, I apprehended his answer rightly, and told the Elders that I perceaved he did not rest in that writing of the 5 Ministers, further than it made way for an order to be made in the Consistory. If this be true, it follows that he did consent and rest in that writing of the Ministers, seeing this order was made and confirmed in the Consistory. And therefore when as on the contrary he afterward would not rest in that writing and order together, both being made for his accommodation, this shows that he changed and went back from his answer rightly apprehended by me. 4. When he yet adds touching this order, and the way made unto it by the writing and his consent in that manner, that I shown myself discontented thereat, it is both untrue, and hath no colour of reason for it (if he mean that the order was made without my consent or against my will) seeing I had a principal hand in the making that order, not only consenting, but also motioning and propounding it, as is noted in the act, and departing from mine own right to make the same as is showed before. Mr. Davenport excepteth further touching that Elders speech, viz. Mr. W. testimony of his consent, and saith, That Elder denyeth that he said so, and knoweth that I said otherwise to him; that which he said (as I am informed) was only to quiet Mr. Paget, etc. I answer, 1. Upon the relation of Mr. W. to whom Mr. Davenport referred me for answer, it is recorded in the * januar. 22 1634. acts of our Consistory, that we found Mr. Davenport consenting unto that writing of the 5 Ministers, and to their counsel and advice upon condition and promise that a * januar. 15 1634. former Act of the Consistory should be observed: which Act or order before mentioned, having been propounded by me, and approved by the rest, was never reversed, but † Februa. 1● 1634. confirmed and enlarged afterwards: And therefore that Act still remaining firm and inviolate, his consent also was to be deemed firm in like manner. This record is an authentic witness of his consent which we found testified unto us. 2. This consent of Mr. Davenport doth not only remain upon record with us; but Mr. W. himself being then scribe of the Consistory, did with his own hand writ down this consent of Mr. Davenport: And therefore he cannot deny, that which thus passed among us, without double blame, for denying both the truth & his own handwriting. 3. Whereas Mr. Davenport saith, that he said otherwise unto him, and that he knoweth it. This concerneth them two to look unto, and to debate among themselves what the one hath said, and what the other knows of it. 4. Mr. W. hath not only in Consistory testified this consent of Mr. Davenport, but hath also said as much unto some of the Dutch Ministers, when they were entreated to further the calling of Mr. Davenport with the Magistrates. Than Mr. W. testified also, that though Mr. Davenport made some difficulty at the first, yet in the end he had consented unto their writing. Should Mr. W. deny what he hath said, as Mr. Davenport would have it, from thence also might he be convicted. By this it may appear, how untrue the report of Mr. Davenport is, who saith afterwards again, It hath been often cleared, that he misunderstood that Elder, if so he understood him. For it was never once cleared: but the contrary is clear and evident by plain testimony, both in and out of the Consistory. 5. If that which this Elder Mr. W. did say, was only to quiet Mr. Paget, as Mr. Davenport saith he is informed, then is this Elder guilty of great dissimulation. For if Mr. Davenport did not consent, would he to quiet me, and only to quiet me, abuse the Eldership with a false testimony, and make it a ground of their proceed? for as is expressed in our Act aforesaid, upon the signification of Mr. Davenport his consent, it was thereupon agreed by general consent, that Mr. Davenport should be chosen for Minister unto this Congregation, and that parties deputed should go unto the Magistrates to seek their approbation and consent for his calling. What had this been else but to have laid a false ground for his calling? And hereupon occasion of controversy might have risen hereafter, and the lawfulness of his calling might have come into question as being procured by deceit and false information. Would Mr. W. only to quiet me, abuse both Magistrates and Classis also, who likewise upon opinion of his accord with us, did give their consent for this calling of Mr. Davenport? When Mr. W. signified unto D. Laurentius, that Mr. Davenport consented unto their writing, was that also only to quiet me? Who sees not what an unsufferable abuse this should have been, for an Elder of the Church to have dallied with so many persons, and to have deluded them in so weighty a cause? 6. That which Mr. Davenport adds, that this Elder told me, that some part of that writing, with an order to be made in the Consistory, being joined together, would settle things, etc. this had been as vain as the rest. But neither was I, nor the other Ministers so simple to be deluded with such talk of a piece, or part of the writing, whereunto consent was required: And besides his consent mentioned in the Act of the Consistory, and written by Mr. W. himself, is not to a part, but absolutely to the writing; and if after such absolute mention of consent to the writing, he should go about so to expound his meaning, that he had meant but a part of the writing; what had it been ●●s but plain equivocation & legerdemain? 7. Whereas Mr. Davenport relates how this Elders speech unto me, was of an order to be made in the Consistory, which being joined together, would settle things, etc. herein it seems they mistook one another: The speech and testimony of the Elder, about the consent of Mr. Davenport, and the record of his consent written by Mr. W. hand, was not in respect of an order to be made, but of an order already made; not in respect of a future, but of a former Act; and upon the observation of that former Act is his consent expressly signified, and set down in the book of our Consistory. Whether this be the error of Mr. Davenport, or the error of Mr. W. let them determine among themselves. Of our going to the Magistrates to seek their allowance for the calling of Mr. DAVENPORT. SECT. XV. UPon the consent of Mr. Davenport to the writing of the 5 Ministers, considered with the order of the Consistory above mentioned, it was thereupon resolved that some should with the first go unto the Burgemaisters, to seek their approbation. Hereunto were deputed Mr. A. & Mr. W. together with myself: and though I at that time was very weak, and not fully recovered of my sickness, yet above my strength I made diverse journeys with our Elders, both unto the Stadthouse and unto the private houses of diverse Burgemaisters, to seek their consent for the allowance of Mr. Davenport, and to further his calling. And some of the Dutch Ministers also being informed by some of our Elders, that Mr. Davenport rested in their advice, did thereupon make intercession to the Magistrates for their admission of Mr. Davenport, which at length they granted with admonition that we should keep correspondence with the Dutch Churches. Whereas I have often professed, that I would not have gone to the Magistrates to seek their consent, unless Mr. Davenport had consented to the writing of the Ministers and their advice, etc. Book of complaints pag. 13. Hereupon Mr. Davenport maketh this inference; If he would not upon other terms have gone to the Magistrate, the whole Congregation and I am the less beholding unto him. I answer, 1. The Congregation is then beholding unto me, when I seek to avoid dissension, which is then done, when I refuse to go unto the Magistrates for their approbation of such Ministers as would nourish dissension among us, by their different practices and discord from us and the Classis, unless by the word of God we were convicted of our sinful courses, which Mr. Davenport hath not done. 2. Our whole Congregation (whereof he speaks) doth not desire that I should go to the Magistrates in such case; many have witnessed the contrary unto me; and so far as I can discern, the greater part of our Congregation do desire such Ministers and none but such, as do accord with the discipline and order observed in these Reformed Churches, and therefore must accordingly accounted themselves beholden unto me for my labour therein, though Mr. Davenport do not. 3. Observe how Mr. Davenport is a sour of discord among brethren, by seeking to implant evil surmises in the hearts of our people, by persuading the members of this Congregation, such as are committed to my charge, that they are not beholden unto me: and how great an injury is it thus to labour to alienate the affections of a Congregation from their Minister? The great pains which I took in going often to the Magistrates in time of my great weakness, this also is ingratefully perverted by Mr. Davenport diverse ways. He saith, it is evident how little I spoke to give satisfaction, and what I spoke might rather serve to increase suspicion. But this is neither evident nor true; and I appeal unto the testimony of the Magistrates themselves herein. I propounded the matter unto the Magistrates, both with special commendation of Mr. Davenport, and with declaration of the special necessity of our Church. I do ordinarily use the fewer words before the Magistrates, speaking in the Dutch tongue, because I am not perfect therein. I spoke the less also, because I would not willingly speak more than I conceived to be true. And our Elders that were with me, spoke so much that I needed to speak the less. He saith further, that the Magistrate was satisfied by other means: But he shows not what those other means were, as had been requisite. And though other means did concur, that should not deface the fruit of my endeavour also. He doth also ingratefully insinuate matter of evil furmise against one of the Dutch Ministers, that was entreated by some of our Elders, to make intercession to the Magistrates for their consent. Mr. Davenport saith, It was so brought about by one of the Dutch Preachers interposing, that the Magistrates gave but a conditional consent unto his call, and made his conformity to this custom of promiscuous baptising, the condition thereof, so that now matters were in a worse state than before. As though the Magistrate could not have given a conditional consent, but by the interposing of that one Preacher; or as though one might not both justly in regard of the matter, and yet with unfeigned affection to Mr. Davenport desire the consent of the Magistrate, upon condition of his agreement with their Church. He is injurious unto me again, when he saith, It is apparent that if Mr. Paget was at that time content to have me join with him, it was but conditionally, that I would do whatsoever he or the Classis would have. For though it be reasonable that I should consent unto his call upon condition of his accord with me and the Classis, yet he overlasheth and looseth the reinss unto his tongue, when he saith, that he should do whatsoever I or the Classis would have; as though his doing of our mere will and lust in all things whatsoever, must be the condition of his calling. It is yet a further reproach when he saith of me, upon which terms he is content to have others, whom he hath no cause to desire for colleagues with him. So his words are in the printed copy, to desire for colleagues with him. And if so they be read, there is a great untruth in them, which he cannot justify, by showing that I desire such unworthy colleagues, whom I have no cause to desire. In the written copies which I have seen, his words are, to refuse for colleagues with him; and if so they be read, they contain a reproachful scorn worse than the other untruth, by carping at my desire, and contentedness to have others, and such colleagues and upon such terms. But this is unworthy of further answer, unless he had showed more plainly what he hath to say of those others, whom I do desire to have for colleagues with me. Of our going to the Classis to seek their consent for the calling of Mr. DAVENPORT. SECT. XVI. AFter consent of the Magistrates, so soon as it could be known, order was taken, that a Classis should be procured to meet extraordinarily, before the appointed time, it being then midwinter; and this being obtained, there were some deputed from among us to go with me unto the Classis, Febr. 6. 1634. where I propounded the matter unto them, who understanding from us how he had declared his consent with them, did readily and willingly in like manner give their consent for his calling. If it be true which Mr. Davenport writes, that upon the conditional consent of the Magistrates, matters were now in a worse state than before; and if he were further from consenting with us, and resting in the advice of the Ministers, why then was the Classis called in vain? why was I not advertised thereof, that so the labour and charge of assembling the Ministers, both of the City and out of the Country also, might have been prevented? Had I known that he was unresolved to accord with us, and to go on in the same practice with us, I would never have made such a proposition for his admission as I did in the Classis: And if any of our Elders that were deputed to go with me, were acquainted with his irresolution or dissenting, why did not they acquaint the Classis therewith, when they heard me testify the consent which he had given? Mr. DAVENPORTS withdrawing of his consent, first made known unto me. SECT. XVII. Febr. 8. 1634. THe consent of the Classis being obtained, our Eldership at the next meeting agreed forthwith to draw a writing, wherein the calling of Mr. Davenport was contained, just in the same form that had been used in writing for Mr. Balmford before. And I myself with Mr. Allen one of our Elders, were sent with this letter unto Mr. Davenport, and prayed him to accept the calling. Upon the receipt of this letter, Mr. Davenport gave us thanks for our good will, but contrary to expectation made some demur upon the matter, desiring time for deliberation, and after some few days signified unto us, that he could not promise' to rest in the advice of the 5 Ministers, contained in their writing, and confirmed by the Magistrate, nor for the present to accept the calling upon such condition. Mr. Davenport in his third reason, to prove that I never desired him, complaineth that I delayed the calling of him so long, that the Elders begun to be impatient, of my delays, for what reasons I best know. Not only I, but our Elders and Mr. Davenport know well enough the cause of my delay, which was to understand and find first of all that he did accord with us. When his consent was once signified unto me, this story shows how without all delay I proceeded with our Elders to hasten his calling. The very same hour that his consent was first made known unto me, the same hour we went into the Consistory, and resolved to elect him for Minister: The next time that the Magistrates sat, we went so seek their consent: Than the Classis without delay was extraordinarily hastened: And then immediately at our next meeting in the Eldership, was the letter of his calling written, and forthwith sent unto him. So vain is his complaint of delays. An other Act of Accommodation, for the satisfying of Mr. DAVENPORT. SECT. XVIII. Mr. Davenport being thus gone back in withdrawing his consent, which before he had given, though it was a just cause of offence unto me and others; yet notwithstanding this I considered with myself what might further be done for his accommodation. And at the next meeting of our Eldership, Febr. 11. 1634. I propounded some thing more than the Classis had counselled or yielded unto, namely that if any at unawares should bring into the Church to be baptised such infants, whose parents were no members of the Church, we should desire and counsel them by the Coster (without absolute denial) to defer the Baptism of them for the present, and to bring their children the next following exercise, that in the mean time there might be conveniency of examination. This being done, and the former act confirmed again, and I promising for my part to prevent all further occasions of offence so much as in me lay, and all the Elders and Deacons each severally and jointly promising the like so much as in them lay, hereupon withal was written down in the same Act a testification of the Eldership, that this being done, we are persuaded no occasion will befall to work any scruple unto Mr. Davenport in that which he fears. Now I confess that herein I yielded unto him more than was meet, and more than I mean to yield unto again; for if infants brought into the Church for baptism, had been carried away unbaptised, suppose it had been done by our entreaty and persuasion only, yet is it like that there would have been much offence taken hereat, with discontentment and murmuring, both in parents and others, especially if such infants had died before the nethering in the Church. Howbeit this also would not content Mr. Davenport unless there might have been an absolute denial of baptism, in such case, if entreaty would not serve. And hence it may appear how unjustly Mr. Davenport complains of me, for the want of brotherly moderation, and for not harkening to means of accommodation, which I had so carefully thought upon more than others, and more than I aught. Whereas I have diverse times affirmed and testified in these regards, that I had done so much in the business for the furtherance of Mr. Davenport his calling, that I would not hereafter do the like again, he frames an objection, to show that once I had desired to have him. Than he gives this answer and saith, If ever he did desire me, I gave him no cause to repent of it, but to desire it more, unless he takes offence at this, that I dare not venture upon doing that which I accounted unlawful, or at this that I report the truth of things as they passed, when I am provoked thereunto. But he aught to know, that though I take no offence at that which he mentioneth; yet in these things he hath given great offence, that he durst venture upon the doing of that which through his fault hath kindled so great a fire in our Church: that he in such a time of controversy among us, about Mr. Hookers opinions, durst venture to thrust in himself among us, before he was resolved to agreed with us in the practice of these Reformed Churches; that he did not better inform himself touching things lawful and unlawful, before he came to condemn that by his practice as unlawful, which is lawful and necessary, and so to give sentence against us, to the hardening of many sorts of our adversaries; that he hath not spared to misreport matters, but spread abroad sundry untruths, as I have partly shown already, and am to do it further. For these and such like reasons, I have less cause to desire his being among us, than I had before. Februar. 15 1634. Mr. Davenport having refused the calling of a Pastor among us, yet a while after he made this offer unto us, that if the Consistory desired it, he would continued as an assistant unto me in preaching for a convenient time, that he might therein acquaint himself with the Dutch Ministers, the orders of the Classis and Synods, and state of this Congregation, etc. But though our Elders liked of this offer, and thought good to desire him to remain with us as an assistant, as is before said; yet I thought it not safe without first taking advice of the Classis. This refusal of his offer by me, is complained of both by Mr. Davenport in his writings, and by these complainants hereafter, where in answer unto them I show the reasons why I liked not his offer. The Acts of the Classis after that the dissent of Mr. DAVENPORT and his refusal of the calling was known. SECT. XIX. WHen the Classis understood that Mr. Davenport did withdraw his consent, and would not rest in the advice of the 5 Ministers, Februar. 27 and 28. 1634. nor accept the calling offered unto him, according to their expectation; then was that writing of the 5 Ministers taken into consideration by all the Ministers of the Classis, and by them all with one consent approved and confirmed. And though the Classis did not like this change in Mr. Davenport, yet did they not suddenly break of with him, but deputed diverse Ministers to go unto him, and to persuade him to accept the calling we had given unto him, and to rest in the counsel of the Ministers formerly given unto him. These deputies went unto him, and with earnest entreaties and persuasions sought to induce him to accept of the calling. At the * April 3. next Classis, he sent a writing unto them, wherein he alleged diverse reasons why he could not rest in the advice of the 5 Ministers, as appears in the printed copy thereof. And yet again after that writing and his dissent specified therein, they did not yet cease to deal with him, but by an other deputation of Ministers sent again unto him, to persuade him unto agreement with them, and to the acceptance of the calling, but could not prevail with him. After this at the * May 1. next monthly Classis, he sent unto them a further answer, delivered unto them in writing, wherein he signified that his mind was wholly turned away from accepting of our call, and that he did voluntarily desist: and withal he added diverse unjust complaints against me, which are also published in the book of complaints. Besides this the Elder Mr. W. that brought this writing unto them, did further signify from him, how he complained that in stead of arguments to persuade him, there was nothing but quaeso, quaeso, bidden and smeecken, that is to say, nothing but praying and beseeching. Hereupon the Classis having had so much patience, and used so much 〈◊〉 in vain, did now at length take this his answer, & rested in his refusal of this calling. The Magistrates also somewhile after this, sending for me with two other of our Elders, required that we should desist from seeking of Mr. Davenport, either for a Pastor or Assistant, and that we should proceed to the calling of another Minister. The Classis also considering what Mr. W. had reported unto them from him, touching that quaso, quaeso, (whether it was given him as a private instruction so to speak, I will not determine, because it is not specified in those public instructions written by Mr. Davenport, and subscribed by him) they did thereupon depute some to make answer unto his writing and his reasons therein, which being done, they yet thought good to keep by them unless they found some new provocation. The preaching of Mr. DAVENPORT in a private house. SECT. XX. WHen Mr. Davenport had in this manner left the calling that had been offered unto him, and did now cease to preach in the Church, yet did he not cease to preach in a private house, where a great part of the Church with most of the Elders and some of the Deacons did meet together to hear him. Under the name of catechising he took a text of Scripture, and expounded the same unto them, and so in a private house kept a public and solemn exercise in a large room, furnished with benches and seats for commodity of hearers, so that by estimation and relation of some that were present, more than an 100 persons have been there sometimes gathered together; an ordinary time being kept upon the Lordsday in the evening, when the sermon in our Church was ended. The fame and noise hereof being bruited through the city, and many wondering thereat, as if some new sect of the English had sprung up; and the report hereof coming also to the ears of the Classis, they deputed two Ministers to inquire the certainty hereof; and it being found that such an assembly was kept, the Classis appointed two Ministers to go both unto Mr. Davenport and to Mr. Wh. in whose house they met; to admonish them of this their meeting, and to show unto them in the name of the Classis, the inconveniency and the dangers of such assemblies, to the end that they might desist. And after this admonition it was left off. Some of the members withdrawing themselves from the Lords Supper. SECT. XXI. AS one extremity sometimes follows an other: so was it with some of the complainants. As they gathered themselves together disorderly in an Assembly, where they aught not; so they withdrew themselves disorderly from the assembly where they aught to have been present. When the time of administering the Lords Supper among us drew near, about two or three days before. Mr. Davenport takes a journey out of the city: some members of the Church (as I heard) did go with him, and leave the communion: a company of the rest, of his special friends, withdraw themselves from the Lord's table, and so gave great occasion of strife and other offence to the Church, by this their course tending to schism. Among those that separated themselves at that time, the chief were those 9 first complainants, that in the first rank subscribed their names, as is above noted. Now howsoever Mr. Davenport (as I hear) doth dislike and speak against separation and schism, and reproves the same, which is no wonder it being so gross and so generally condemned; yet can he not altogether clear himself from being some occasion of division among us, while he maintaineth such practices so different from us, and from these Reformed Churches, whereby our people are hardened to contention and opposition, etc. The injurious writing of Mr. DAVENPORT first spread abroad secretly & afterwards printed. SECT. XXII. AFter the scandalous schism, followed the slanderous writing of the complainants against me: and after the comes forth the injurious writings of Mr. Davenport, not only against me, but against the Classis also. The title of that writing is unjustly called a true report of passages. In his preamble he doth generally complain of misreports and injurious speeches; but he shows not particularly what they were, much less prooveth them to be such. If he intent those that are mentioned afterward pag. 12. they are already answered. He bids us be assured that this English copy is a true translation out of the Latin. But this translation of his letter is not true in this, that having twice ●●ed that odious phrase pro imperio, or imperiously; in the second place it is left out in his translation, both in this printed, and in so many other written copies as I have seen. This I note the rather, because the Classis in their answer showing the injury of this his speech, do complain, that it is once and again used by him; which answer of theirs, if it were compared with this faulty translation, could not be found to accord therewith in regard of this omission. In his first writing, namely his letter to the Classis, what untruth there is in his misreporting of the private conference which he had with me, and other complaints, I have showed before Section 11. and is further to be showed hereafter. In his second writing of instructions committed to some deputed Elders, if he mean any lawfully deputed by the Eldership, there is a foul untruth or falsification, both in the superscription and the subscription thereof, when he saith of those instructions, that they were delivered by the Elders of the English Church deputed, for M. W. that brought them, was not deputed by the Eldership thereunto, neither was any such deputation made in our Consistory. And in the description of those instructions, what untruth there is in that unjust complaint for want of brotherly moderation, I have noted before Section 12. In his third writing, after he had in his first complained of me to the Classis, to make me odious to them; having in his second writing given instructions to some of our Elders, to teach them how to fill their mouths with reproach of me, and how to accuse me, as well as to excuse him: he proceeds yet further, and in his third writing he most strangely accuseth me to the other members of our Church, by such an undermining course as is fit to stir up and incense the Congregation against me, by affording unto them matter of complaint, and giving them opportunity to spread abroad, and disperse his defamatory writings in such manner as is done. In this his third writing pag. 12. there is an unjust upbraiding of me for his assistance of me, with a vain boasting of himself, answered Section 2. and Sect. 8. and 40. He doth therein complain of two special injuries done unto him by me, whereof the first complaint is answered Section 11. and the second Sect. 14. He frameth 5 objections from report of my speeches, and then sets down his answers thereunto, of which answers, the first is refuted Section 14. the second is refuted Sect. 15. the third is refuted Sect. 15. the fourth is refuted Sect. 10. the fift is refuted Sect. 18. Than he bringeth 6 reasons to prove that I never desired to have him, of which reasons the first is answered Section 9 second is answered Sect. 8. third is answered Sect. 17. fourth is answered Sect. 12. fifth is answered Sect. 28. sixth is answered Sect. 6. But suppose I had not desired to have Mr. Davenport, and that I would in our election of a Minister, rather have preferred some other before him; must this needs be made a quarrel and a matter of contention? Is he such a man of desire, that I might not withhold my desire from him in the act of election, and use my liberty in giving my voice unto another, whom I might judge to be more lowly, more loving, more faithful & upright, and many ways a more fit fellow-labourer for me? It is certainly a want of modesty and prudence in him to make such disputes about his own desireablenes; and little care had he of the edification of our Church, to furnish them with such reasons written down by him, to prove that I desired him not. Would I follow his example, I might set down 6 new reasons on the other side, to show that I was not bound to restrain my desire to him, but might rather have desired some others. But it becometh not the servants of Christ to enter willingly into such disputes; and I wish I had not been compelled by his importunity to answer these his complaining reasons given out against me. To return then unto these complainants, where I left them for a time, having answered their first, let us now proceed to their second main proof, whereby they would manifest that I do not behave myself as a Pastor in the government of the Church. complainants. SECT. XXIII. SEcondly Mr. Paget depriveth the Elders of their power in government, for the good of the Church, which will thus appear. First, when matters have been referred to the Elders to determine, he hath rejected their counsel and opinions, sometimes accusing them of partiality, sometimes of insufficiency to judge, when he thought they would conclude against his purpose. ANSWER. FIrst of all, the decision and determination of matters in our Eldership, hath always been by most voices: If three Elders judged one way, though both the Ministers were contrary minded, yet plurality of voices did still prevail. I never claimed or usurped such power to give sentence of any controversy by any sole authority of mine; neither do I ever remember any one resolution concluded without consent of most. And therefore this complaint is a very unjust slander. 2. Though I have often and upon occasion still do oppose the counsel and opinions of some Elders, sometimes more, and sometimes less, it follows not that I therefore deprive them of their power in government. I should be base man-pleaser, and no faithful servant of Christ, if I should not oppose, contradict and reject that which I conceive to be against right and truth, hurtful to the Church or to any member thereof. 3. The Elders themselves in those matters that are brought before us, do in like manner as they judge best, refuse and oppose the counsel and opinions, both of me and of one an another: William. B. formerly and La. Co. presently a Deacon, sometimes upon special occasion sitting with us, and ordinarily in their own session about the affairs of the poor, have given contradictory voices, and sometimes reject the counsel and opinions of one another. What is it then that blinds the eyes of these two complainants in special that from the observation of their own practice, they cannot see this, that the rejecting of other men's opinions doth not prove a deprivation of power in such? Yea is their any Senate either civil or ecclesiastical, wherein this refusal and rejecting of opinions doth not fall out? And therefore most unreasonable are these complaints that argue & in●erre a deprivation of power thereby. 4. For my accusing them sometimes of partiality and insufficiency to judge, had these complainants noted the particular instances, wherein I so accused them, I should then have given further answer. I do remember that during the controversy about Mr. Hooker some such things have been spoken. What I then spoke with my reasons thereof, which I then alleged, I conceive to be just, but will not now enter into the large narration thereof, upon such a general provocation as this is. He that rehearseth a matter, seeketh strife, as do these complainants, and especially Will. B. that doth hereby violate the agreement made before the deputies of the Synod and Classis, and consented unto by himself that was present, by accusing me of such things as were then ended. 5. As for our Elders being parties, (not to speak of any other things, then of such as these complainants do accuse me of in this their present writing) I have just cause to except against them in this controversy about Mr. Davenport, and therefore not to allow them for judges, they being parties, namely these three, Mr. Wa. Mr. Wh. and Mr. Bea. as appeareth diverse ways, First, these three have diverse times professed themselves to be of the same opinion with Mr. Davenport, touching the Baptism of infants, contrary to the received order of our own and the Dutch Church; and therefore are fit themselves to be judged as parties, then to be allowed for judges of such an accusation, as these complainants do make against me in this writing, for calling Mr. Davenport his opinion an error. Again these three have by their example allowed and countenanced that unwarrantable assembly of so great a multitude meeting in Mr. Wh. his house, without just allowance, and therefore more fit to be judged of the offence that they have given to many thereby, then being parties to be admitted for judges in this controversy, wherein these accusers complain of me, for depriving them of their benefit obtained by such an assembly. Again, these Elders having made an Act for Mr. Davenport his preaching among us, as an Assistant for a certain time, not assented unto by me, nor after allowed by the Classis, though these complainants come again, and bring this as an accusation of me, yet are not the Elders, who are now parties, to be allowed for judges to give sentence, whether themselves have done well in making this Act, or whether I did well in not consenting unto them. Moreover these complainants do here accuse me, for bringing matters to the Classis by violence, without consent of the Eldership● the Elders themselves have made like complaint heretofore: The Classis hath judged hereof; the Elders have appeared to be parties; how can they then judge of these things, without presuming to be judges in their own cause that is judged already? Even the Elders themselves have sometimes acknowledged, that when such complaints as these have been brought unto them, they had no power to judge thereof: When after the refusal of Mr. Hooker by the Classis, Octob. 19 1631. diverse complainants came unto the Consistory, and complained of me about the carriage of the business, it was answered them by the Eldership, that the judgement of the matter was out of their hands and in the Classis: How much more aught it now to be so answered unto them, when after so long a time, they come again and complain not only about Mr. Davenport, but about Mr. Hooker also? It must needs be manifest partiality, and our Elders were justly to be excepted against as parties, if they should resume the same business, and presume to give a new judgement thereof. 6. As for the insufficiency of our Elders, not to speak of that common insufficiency that is in all men, in regard of spiritual and holy administrations and services, 2. Cor. 2.16 of which the Apostle saith, Who is sufficient for these things? I have just cause to except against their insufficiency in some special cases, and namely in such particulars whatsoever have been already judged and determined in the Classis, but principally in such a weighty and important business as is this present controversy of these complainants, which concerns the innovation and alteration of the discipline and government, so long practised in these Reformed Churches. For not the Classis itself, nor yet a Provincial Synod, hath power to determine and appoint such a state and form of government, as this writing of my accusers pleads for: seeing no inferior judicatory can reverse that which is judged and decreed by a superior; and therefore can no Classis or Provincial Synod, abrogate and disannul that which is concluded by a Nationall Synod: Much less than is the Consistory of one particular Church sufficient to do it; lest of all may a piece of the Consistory do it; and such a piece as consists only of some Elders ●i●joy●●d 〈…〉 Ministers, one or more, and wanting their assistance therein; especially when the same Elders are known to be parties, and justly complained of therein. Thus is their first reason answered; what is their second argument to prove the Elders deprived of their power in government? complainants. SECT. XXIV. SEcondly, when the Elders have declared their judgement with one consent, he hath protested against it, and carried it to the Classis, though the matter hath been such, as seeing it might have been ended in the Consistory, aught not to have been brought thither, as, ANSWER. 1. WHat if I protest against the unanimous consent and judgement of the Elders in some special case, wherein I think they err? do I therefore deprive them of their power in government? How can they ever prove this consequence? This imagined consequence is the string that they are still harping upon, but it still jarreth and erreth; they can never bring it into tune, nor ever confirm it with any good reason. They have made themselves opponents and accusers, and it lies upon them to bring proofs, but they bring none, neither from Scripture, nor from any good reason. With what face or conscience can these men accuse me, not only of sin, but of obstinacy in sin, and yet bring such weak and lame reasons, without any virtue or power to convince? 2. If I should not protest against the concordant judgement of Elders, and bring the matter to further trial, when I conceive their resolutions to be unlawful & hurtful to the Church, I should sinne against God and mine own conscience, Exod. 23.2. Eph. 5.11. in following a multitude to do evil, and in partaking with the unproffitable works of error and darkness. 3. Seeing we maintain against the Romish Church, that Synods and Counsels are subject unto error sometimes, and for proof thereof * Ezek. 7.26. jer. 4.9. 1. Cor. 13.9 Rom. 3.4. Heb. 5.2. many evidences are showed from the Scriptures; seeing in such cases there is liberty for the servants of Christ, to protest against those resolutions and decrees, which they are in conscience persuaded to be erroneous: how much more may we think that a Consistory, where 3 or 4 Elders make an agreement and decree, without consent of their Minister, are subject to error, and therefore in such case may lawfully be protested against by the same Ministers. If neither Classis nor Synods be exempted from protesting against, what reason is there that I should be blamed for protesting against the lest kind of Eldership, as though they were quite overthrown thereby? Who knows not that a child, a servant or subject may sometimes lawfully protest against the commandments of their father, master, or governor, and refuse to obey them, and yet not deprive them of their power in government, though in that particular act, which they conceive to be unlawful and dangerous, they refuse to harken unto them? Eph. 6.1. Act. 4.19. Now as obedience to superiors aught to be in the Lord; so all agreement and consent to Elders aught to be in the Lord, and no further. 4. Whereas they say further that I carry the matter to the Classis, when it was such as might have been ended in the Consistory, etc. that I deny, and they cannot prove their assertion. And when is the time, that matters cannot be ended in the Consistory, but then especially, when neither part can satisfy an other touching their differences? When neither Elders can satisfy me, nor I persuade them in that which I believe to be just and necessary, then in such case the judgement of others is needful for determination of the question. And therefore in these cases ordinarily matters are brought unto the Classis: When either there is a common business that concerns many Churches, and therefore requires the consent of all: or when the business is so weighty, that by former general consent of Churches testified by their deputies, meeting together in their Synods, it hath been agreed, that the same shall not be proceeded in without advice of the Classis, such as is the election of Ministers, the excommunication of offenders and the like: or when in matters of less importance there is an opposition, strife and disagreement, some thinking wrong to be done to themselves or the Church, when others are opposite or contrary minded: or when there is but fear or danger of hurt imagined, to seek counsel for preventing the same. The reason hereof is taken from the very foundation of government, and * Deut. 17.8 ●ith 1.12. 2. Chron. 19.8.9.10. institution of diverse judicatories, which was to take away disagreement, strife, controversies or different plead among men. 5. Suppose I had erred in bringing any matter unlawfully unto the Classis, yet had not the power of the Elders in government been overthrown thereby, but the blame would have come upon my self; seeing the order and manner of the Classis is in such cases to remit the matter unto the Consistories again, when it is not duly and lawfully brought unto them. Come we now to the particular instances, whereby they exemplify their assertion. complainants. SECT. XXV. FIrst, when the Consistory agreed, that an order should be made, that all that were not members of this Church, should make themselves known unto Mr. Davenport, that he might be satisfied concerning them, before they should present their children to Baptism in this Church, which order would have ended the difference between them, if it had taken place, but Mr. Paget protested against it. ANSWER. 1. IT seems these complainants have been very careless of witnessing the truth, and speak they know not what. Section 13. Ianu. 15. 1634. & Sect. 18. Febr. 11. 1634. For as I have showed before, there was an order made in the consistory for the accommodation of Mr. Davenport, by procuring so far as we could, that the parents, which were no members of the Church, should be sent unto Mr. Davenport, that he might be satisfied by the examination of them, before their children were baptised: And this order was so made, that the Eldership hath testified in the writing thereof, that they were persuaded, upon the observation thereof, no occasion would befall to work any scruple to Mr. Davenport in that which he feared. And I was so far from protesting against it, that I was the first that propounded the same. 2. As for any other peremptory order to compel and bind the parents to come unto him, or else by an absolute denial to repel their children from baptism; I do not remember that there was any such order agreed upon in the Consistory: neither is there any evidence in our Church-book, that either our Elders had so agreed, or that I had protested therein against them. 3. If any such order had been peremptorily resolved in the Consistory, there had been just reason for me to have protested against it, seeing the Consistory neither hath power over those which are no members of the Church, to compel them to come unto the private examination of Mr. Davenport, nor yet sufficient cause to deprive their infants of Baptism, so long as the same parents refuse not to make public profession of their faith before the whole Church, according to the form observed in the administration of Baptism. But as for entreaty and persuasion of them to come unto Mr. Davenport for private examination, I did even more than was meet, as is noted before. 4. If I had protested against such an order, yet had I not deprived the Elders of their power in government thereby. Such a protest might have served for a correction and direction to guide them to the right use of their power, but did not tend to the destruction thereof. These ill-advised complainants do make themselves guilty of false accusations, while they want proof to warrant their unjust inferences. But what other instances do they bring? complainants. SECT. XXVI. SEcondly, when the Elders agreed that Mr. Davenport should have a years time to go on in assisting Mr. Paget in preaching, to see if in that time he could procure that this question might be laid down, and might be fully informed of all the orders and customs of the Dutch Church, whereunto Mr. Paget would bind him to conform, as a condition whereupon he was to be admitted to the Pastoral office in this Church, Mr. Paget opposed this as if the Consistory could not have power to do so much without the Classis, and many the like things might be brought; as that he would not let Mr. Weld preach, whom he professed he had nothing against, without the leave of the Classis, etc. ANSWER. 1. IT is untrue that the Elders agreed he should have a year's time granted. They thought it not expedient to specify the definite time of a year; but without limitation they agreed he should have a convenient time. So is it testified in the records of this Act. 2. It is here to be observed, how the affairs of the Eldership, which aught to have been kept secret, are unlawfully divulged contrary to the laws thereof; and that untruly also. So was it in the former instance about the order taken for examination of parents, both disorderly and falsely reported abroad, which reports these complainants have unjustly received against me. 3. It is a partial and odious relation of them, when they speak of my binding Mr. Davenport to the orders and customs of the Dutch, whereas he could not be bound thereunto by me; neither would I take upon myself to bind any man by my authority: He that is bound in such case, must be bound by the authority of a lawful Ecclesiastical assembly. 4. As for the Elders agreement of an uncertain convenient time, which might have been, I know not how long, I did not absolutely oppose it neither, as I might justly have done, but thought it not safe to consent unto it without advice of the Classis, and so is my speech recorded in the Act thereof. The reasons I had were diverse, both in respect of myself and the Church. For Hereby, the cord of contention should have been drawn out, and lengthened among us, whiles matters were kept in suspense, and no conclusion of the business. Hereby, in the Consistory, where I had most trouble, I should have had lest assistance: no help at all, where I most needed it, and the Church also: seeing he could not sit with us there, while he had no Pastoral charge, but must have been a lose assistant. Hereby in the administration of Baptism, in stead of an Assistant, I should have had a Resistant: his daily example in refusing to baptism such as I should, serving to strengthen others in their opposition and contention against me. Hereby should have been hindered the calling of an other Minister, who agreeing with us, might be a true assistant unto me. Hereby the Church should have wanted the comfort, which another Minister lawfully called by virtue of that bond, might have ministered unto them, in such visitations as Mr. Davenport uncalled should not have been bound unto. Hereby offence might have been given unto the Classis, which had formerly disallowed such an agreement of the Elders about the entertaining of Mr. Hooker, as a lecturer or assistant, though not confirmed as a Pastor among us. And in sum I esteemed this agreement as an act of intrusion for Mr. Davenport, that he having preached so long among us, might afterward not easily or not without difficulty be dismissed, whether he should then agreed with us or not: and so had been no end of dissension. And though Mr. Davenport in his writing to the Classis do also complain of me for this very thing, Book of complains pag. 1.2. & 8. even as these complainants do, and doth twice largely repeat this agreement of the Elders, as a matter ●o worthy to be insisted upon, and professeth his hope that they would assent unto their agreement of the Elders, having been his own motion and offer, and as he saith, so cheerfully embraced by the Elders; yet notwithstanding the Classis found no reason to satisfy his expectation therein. And for this cause as he had spoken of it in the beginning, and end of his first writing unto them, so he comes again the third time in his late postscript, and complains of the Classis, Pag. 9 saying, And who would not have thought that the Classis would have approved of the desire of the Consistory, that a years time should be granted me for the ends aforesaid? Yet on the contrary they seemed to be offended, threatening to complain to the Magistrates, etc. It is here also to be observed, how Mr. Davenport goes before these complainants, and by his example teacheth them to take up this complaint against me. They do fill the vial of their indignation and contention, out of the cistern or lake of his complaints. He having three several times objected it, it is not strange that they should be inflamed, when he so often blows the fire. But why do they not rather complain of the Classis as he began at last? And what reason have they to bring such complaints as this, which have been determined in the Classis upon the complaint of Mr. Davenport? A third instance which they allege, is that I would not let Mr. Weld preach without leave of the Classis, though I professed I had nothing against him. Hereunto I answer, 1. Though there was no particular error which I imputed unto Mr. Weld, yet for his behaviour in general, this was an offence and trouble unto me, and made me the more unwilling to have him preach, being a stranger, because he refused to declare himself, and to show his opinion touching our present controversies: herein I thought he dealt not so plainly as he aught to have done for my satisfaction. And seeing him most familiar with those that were my chiefest opposites, I feared lest he might do as Mr Hooker had done before, in strengthening and animating them against me, by preaching against that in the afternoon, which I had taught in the forenoon, viz. by his giving allowance unto private men to preach. 2. Even that which I did herein was not unadvised: for going unto the Dutch Consistory, which consists of many Ministers & many Elders, and desiring their counsel; they though they had no power to judge and determine the matter by their sentence, being but a member of the Classis, as we also are, yet they refused not to give their counsel unto me, which was that I should bring the matter to the Classis; which counsel I also followed. 3. When upon further conference with Mr. Weld, I perceaved in him a peaceable disposition, and conceived that he would not give offence by his preaching among us, I made the same known unto the Classis; whereupon he was admitted to preach, and my desire was that he might have done it longer. Such are the instances whereby they would prove that I deprive the Elders of their power, and give too little unto them; let us now proceed unto their next main complaint, that I give too much power unto the Classis; thereby to manifest that I do not behave myself as a Pastor in the government of this Church. complainants. SECT. XXVI. THirdly, he subjecteth this Church under an undue power of the Classis, which he bringeth it under merely for his own ends, as we conceive, without any warrant from the Word of God, as thus appeareth, ANSWER. IN this third complaint concerning government, observe these unconscionable slanders in the proposition thereof: 1. It is a slander of the Classis, when they charge it with an unlawful or undue power, under which our Church is subjected. This slander is against the very state of government and form of Discipline, observed and practised in these Reformed Churches. Our Church is no otherwise subject unto the Classis, then are all other Churches that stand in the same combination with us, for their mutual help & benefit. Accusers are to bring proof: if these accusers can bring proof from the Word of God, then is it meet that the Classis and every member thereof should confess their faults, their tyranny, usurpation, unlawful dominion and undue power that hath been exercised by them. Than is it meet that this present government should be dissolved, and a new order of discipline established, such an one as William. Best, ja. Cr. Nic. ja. Th. Fl. Aug. Hor. Ios. St. and their companions can show unto us out of the Word of God. But this is their double guiltiness; they are too hasty and quick in accusing, and too slow in proving. They aught to have deferred their accusation, till they had brought their proofs from the Scripture with them. 2. It is another slander when they say, that I have subjected this Church under an undue power of the Classis; that I have brought it under etc. That power which the Classis exerciseth is ancient; the same power which they had long before I either knew them or they me; the same power which hath been determined, limited & agreed upon in many national Synods of old. And as for me, if I had the will, yet have I no power to be the author of such an exploit as they do here asscribe unto me. 3. It is a further slander and unjust surmise, when they say of me, that I have done this merely for mine own ends. The purest and perfectest men on earth, have their mixtures of the flesh with the spirit, defiling their best works; but to say of this imagined enthralment & subjection, that I have done it, and this only or merely for mine own ends, as if they were such perfect discerners of the thoughts & intents of the hart, this is a great arrogancy, and a setting of themselves in God's stead, whose peculiar it is to search, and to judge the hart and reinss. 4. If the power of the Classis be an undue power, as they say, then would I fain know of them, what that due power is, by which they would have the Church to be governed, unto which they would willingly be subjected. For my part I could never yet come to the knowledge thereof by any of them. Is it that power of popular government exercised among the Brownists, so as Mr. Aynsworth maintained it? Or is it that power of an Eldership, which Mr. johnson taught without any Classis? Or is it that kind of single uncompounded policy, which Mr. jacob required? Or is it any new unknown form of government, which they have found out? If they can show us what it is, and agreed of it among themselves, and show further that it agrees with the Word of God, then as they desired their complaints against me might be registered, with place left for the names to be subscribed, that after times might know what evils they had testified against: then I say, they may as well desire, that their exploit may be recorded, that their 20 names may be registered, that after times may know who the persons were, that above other learned men have found out where the due power of the Church is. Let us hear their instances to declare how I subject this Church to the undue power of the Classes. complainants. SECT. XXVIII. FIrst he giveth them power to serve his ends, in keeping out any Minister, whom he would have kept out, for causes pretended by him (though he would have had other that to this day hold the same opinion) though such as he keepeth out be known to be most eminent, able and godly men, and such as abhor all Heresy and Schism, which he hath caused the Classis to execute upon Mr. Hooker, Mr. Davenport, etc. which we are confident they would not have done but by Mr. Pagets' suggestions, to the great grief and hurt of the members of this Church. ANSWER. IN this instance there be also sundry bold and rude slanders, 1. In saying, I give them power to serve my ends in keeping out any Minister, etc. The power which the Ministers of the Classis have, is not of my gift; they had that power which they exercise before I was. And if by giving of them power, they mean that I approve their power; yet that also is slanderous in making my approbation of them, to be an instance and evidence of my ill-governing the Church. 2. In this accusation they are notorious slanderers of the Classis, in making them no better than thiefs, unlawfully receiving that power, which I unlawfully give unto them, as if they were my vassals and bondslaves to serve my lusts. If it were true which these immodest accusers do suggest in this writing, then where should men find either more base flatterers on the one side, or more cruel tyrants and oppressors on the other side, then are the Ministers of this Classis, that like blind unconscionable judges, for my pleasure, by my suggestions, for causes pretended by me, to serve my ends, should deal so unrighteously, with so eminent and godly men, by executing their undue power upon them? As Herod to kill one infant, spared not to kill a multitude of other infants: so these complainants that they may undermine me, and blow up me into the air, they care not, nor spare not with the gunpowder of their fiery contention and reproaches, to blow up with me a multitude of learned and godly Ministers, being of the same judgement and practice. 3. Whereas they say of Mr. Ho●ker and Mr. Davenport, that they were such as abhor all schis●●; it appears to the contrary, that they did not abhor schism as was meet. Not Mr. Hooker; whiles he maintained that such of the Brownists, as persisted in their schism or separation from the Church of England, might lawfully be received of us for members of our Church: Whiles he would not disallow such of our Church, as went to hear the Brownists in their schismatical assembly: While he maintained that private men might preach and expound the Scriptures at set times and places, where the members of sundry families met together, and this without allowance of the Church: Whiles he maintained that Churches combined together in the Classis, might choose a Minister, either without or against the consent of the Classis, under which they stood. So to practise in these Reformed Churches, is no other than a plain act of schism, a tending from the Classis, and a breaking off from their communion in the government of the Church. Not Mr. Davenport; whiles he gathered unto himself a great and solemn assembly apart, by preaching unto them at set times in a private house, without allowance of the Church: Whiles he approved the Act of our Elders, in admitting him to preach as an assistant, without the consent of the Classis, in such manner as is before noted. While he maintaineth the power of every particular Church to be chief in its own particular matters; and applieth this to the admission of Ministers to preach as assistant, etc. though these Churches be united in Synod and Classis. In all these things they did not abhor schism as they aught to have done. 4. Whereas they speak so much of eminent persons refused; who knows not what imminent danger ariseth by them, when even they sometimes are led aside by their own spirits, and blinded with love of their own private opinions? Mr. Ainsworth, Mr. johnson, Mr. Robinson were all eminent men, professing godliness, and for learning not inferior to Mr. Davenport, and yet withal maintained such opinions and practices, some of them more and some less, as tended to the ruin & desolation of Churches, so that they could not safely have been called to the ministry of the Gospel in any of these Reformed Churches. 5. It is here to be observed, how these complainants as they go along with their particular accusations of evil and tyrannical government, still they make Mr. Davenport the burden of their song. They accuse me that I deprive the Church of that liberty and power that Christ hath given it in the free choice of their Pastor; This they prove, because Mr. Davenport with others were rejected and opposed, etc. They accuse me of depriving the Elders of their power in government: This they would make to appear by instances, that an order of the Elders for the satisfaction of Mr. Davenport, by examination of parents was opposed and protested against by me; and because I consented not Mr. Davenport might have a year's time to go on in assisting me to preach, etc. They accuse me of subjecting the Church to the Classis, by giving them power to keep out any Ministers, and they prove it by the instances of Mr. Davenport, etc. And so in other points afterward. They accuses me of bitterness in doctrine, and they would prove it by instances of provoking Mr. Davenport thereby. In the main circle and circumference of their disputation, Mr. Davenport is the centre, and all the chief lines of their complaint are drawn from this centre. The inordinate desire of Mr. Davenport hath made this trouble to the Church. 6. As for that their parenthesis, wherein they note that I would have had other that to this day hold the same opinion: This Mr. Davenport himself allegeth more plainly and expressly, as his first reason, to prove that I never desired to have him. The first instance he bringeth against me, is this; Book of complaints pag. 15. He pressed earnestly to have Mr. Balmford of the Hague, though he gave him the same answer unto the question which I have done, before I came into these parts. Hereunto I answer, First, it is untrue, and I do utterly deny it, that Mr. Balmford gave me the same answer unto the question, which Mr. Davenport did: neither can Mr. Davenport ever prove this his assertion. If Mr. Balmford should affirm his answer to have been the very same; yet aught not his affirmation to be taken against my denial in such case as this. The reason is evident from the express ordinance of God, who hath apppointed, Deu. 19.15 Mat. 18.16 joh. 8.17. that for determining the truth in controversies, touching matter of fact, two witnesses at the lest should be had. One witness shall not rise against a man for any trespass, 1. Tim. 5.19. or for any sin, or for any 〈◊〉 that he offendeth in, etc. In special against an Elder, no accusation is to be received under two or three witnesses. And therefore can no man with good conscience receive the single testimony of one person against me, as Mr. Davenport hath done. januar. 4. 1635. n. style. Secondly, to take the answer of Mr. Balmford, even as he himself hath now of late set it down, under his own hand; yet can it not thence be justly concluded, that it was the same answer, which Mr. Davenport gave. Mr. Balmford saith, that he being asked whether he would baptism those which were presented to Baptism, though not children of any member of our Congregation, his answer was to this effect, viz. that the case might be that I should, and the case might be that I should not: And more than to this effect (he saith) he answered not. Now this is not the same with Mr. Davenport his answer, and that in diverse respects, which I could show: but this may suffice for the present, that even in the writing of the 5 Ministers, confirmed by the Classis, and impugned by Mr. Davenport, there is a liberty reserved in some cases that may fall out, that the Minister doubting whether the infant presented aught to be baptised, may then first require the judgement of the whole Consistory, or if need be of the Classis, and so obtain further resolution thereby. But this would not satisfy Mr. Davenport, which yet might have satisfied Mr. Balmford, notwithstanding any thing that appears in his answer to the contrary. Thirdly, that Mr. Balmford was not of the same opinion with Mr. Davenport, and therefore could not give the same answer with him, may appear by that form of calling, which was sent in writing unto Mr. Balmford, Octob. 18. 1632. when he was called unto this place. For being called to minister the word and the dependences thereof, according to the order of these Reformed Churches, and especially of these which are combined with the Classis of Amsterdam; and making no exception against this form, but resting therein after that this question had been propounded unto him, this is taken for an evidence that he was willing to observe their order in the administration of Baptism to such as they use to do, and so it was understood by the Classis. And had Mr. Davenport accepted this call, when it was in the same form offered unto him, that would also have been taken for a grant of his professed agreement with us, otherwise than we now find. Fourthly, if it be demanded why I did not more particularly and strictly inquire into the opinion of Mr. Balmford, as well as of Mr. Davenport; my answer is, because I found not such ambiguity in the answer of Mr. Balmford unto the other questions, which I had propounded unto him, as I did in the answers of Mr. Davenport, especially concerning the authority of Synods and Classis, about which he made some difficulty, and was hardly drawn to consent: And though at length I conceived that he agreed with us, yet it seems that he did in some manner hide his meaning, as appeareth by that which he hath written since unto the Classis, touching the power of particular Churches, as being chief in their own particular matters. Fiftly, considering the estate of that English Church, whereof Mr. Balmford is Minister, and what the practice thereof hath been in the admission of members, and receiving them unto the Sacraments, as hath been formerly signified unto me, I thought there was no reason for me, to be more earnest in enquiring of this matter; wherein I judged him not to use more strictness than was observed by us. The other instance to prove that I desired him not, Mr. Davenport sets down in these words, And since he hath nominated Mr. Roe of Flushing: though he in answer unto a letter, which Mr. Paget sent unto him concerning this matter, professed himself to be of my judgements. Hereunto I answer, 1. If I had given my voice for the calling of Mr. Roe, being of the same judgement with Mr. Davenport, yet would not this prove that for which Mr. Davenport allegeth it, viz. that I never desired him. It might prove that I desired Mr. Roe more than him, and that I would have borne with the difference of Mr. Roe more than of him, etc. But this cannot prove that I did never desire him, or not at all desire him; seeing there are diverse degrees of desire; and for the desire of some friends, a man can tolerate more, then for others whom he yet truly desireth and affecteth, though not in the same measure. 2. The truth is; that nomination which I made of Mr. Roe, was not a giving of my voice for his calling, but only a mentioning of his name among many other Ministers in these Countries, that were taken into consideration, and that to this end, that there might be made a further enquiry touching their gifts, and touching their agreement with us, by sending for them, that we might hear them, and confer with them, as we have done with diverse others, with whom yet we never proceeded so far as to come unto the election of them. This nomination of Mr. Roe was not such an act of election as when I gave my voice and consent for the calling of Mr. Davenport. And therefore things are here notably mismatched together by Mr. Davenport, which might deceive an ignorant reader. 3. Whatsoever profession Mr. Roe did make of agreeing with the judgement of Mr. Davenport, yet was it not strange or unreasonable for me to hope, that upon conference with him, he might be brought to leave that his opinion. Why might I not mention his name to this end that he might be sent for, that so I might have had opportunity to see whether I could have satisfied his objections, and taken away his scruples? Seeing so great pains was taken with Mr. Davenport for his persuasion, not only by such as were deputed of the Classis, but by sundry others upon occasion, why might not some part of the like love have been showed to Mr. Roe also? What an unworthy thing is it, that Mr. Davenport should make such a dispute about himself, touching my desire of him, and spread these complaints among our people in such an unwarrantable manner as he hath done? complainants. SECT. XXIX. SEcondly he giveth them power to make laws and orders, whereunto whosoever will be Minister of this Church, must submit, as to observe all the orders and customs of the Dutch Church, though some of them are such as the Ministers of the Dutch would cast off, if the vastues of their Church (being but one in so great a city) did not force them thereunto; of which the promiscuous baptising of all that are brought, without difference or knowledge of them, is one; for which Mr. Davenport is kept out of this Church, though there is no need of tying the Minister of this Church to that custom, the Congregation being small; and who can think they would tie us so strictly to all their orders, when one of them said to Mr. Paget (on occasion of his complaint in the Classis of Mr. Davenport, not conforming to their orders) why? yourself do not conform to all our orders; and certainly they would all have rejoiced, to have heard that all our differences had been ended amongst ourselves; yea he hath of late (as we hear) required of the Elders to make an order in the Consistory, that whatsoever Minister shall hereafter be called to this Church, should conform to a writing which he got 5 Ministers, to make in his own house about that question, and sent it to Mr. Davenport, which we think no godly man will absolutely be bound unto. ANSWER. THeir second instance to show how I subject the Church unto the undue power of the Classis, is because I give them power to make laws and orders, etc. I answer, 1. It is untrue that I give them this power. 2. If I had first given them counsel to use this power, how do they prove that this power of making such orders is an undue power? or how can they prove their principal accusation from hence, that I do not behave myself as a Pastor in the government of the Church? 3. These complainants themselves do allow the Consistory to make orders & laws; they complain of me, that I protested against making of an order for accommodation of Mr Davenport, by sending the parents unto him, etc. Can this power of making laws & orders be lawful and due in a Consistory, and yet an undue power in the Classis? Are they not condemned of themselves? 4. When they say, I give them power to make laws; they do in some measure free me from usurpation, in that I do not arrogate & take this power to myself, but give it unto others. Can they have said that I usurp the power of making laws, their accusation had been heavyer. 5. It is false, which they speak of submitting to observe all the orders and customs of the Dutch Church; for neither do I give, neither do they take or exercise such power, that whosoever will be Minister of this Church, must submit himself to all the orders and customs of the Dutch Church; some of them being of lesser importance, about things indifferent and such as might be omitted without offence, for which they would not exclude a Minister. To that which they say of the Dutch Ministers, willing to cast off some of their customs, if the vastues of their Church (being but one in so great a City) did not force them thereunto, etc. I answer, 1. For things that are simply unlawful, there is the same reason of them in a great Church as in a small, and they are to be cast off as well in the one as in the other. To deny baptism unto such infants as it belongs unto, is simply a sin: To determine that such or such infants are under the covenant, or not under the covenant, is a matter of great weight; and to give wrong sentence therein, either way must needs be a great sin: neither have I heard of any one Minister among them all, that would deny Baptism on such a ground as Mr. Davenport doth. 2. Though the Dutch Church in this City be great, yet the Dutch Churches that are in the villages round about, being members of the same Classis with us, are generally or for the most part far less than this of ours; and yet even there also in those smaller Congregations the same order is observed for baptising of those infants, whose parents are no members of the Church. And therefore their exception in this regard is vain. Whereas they tell of one Minister that should speak of my not conforming to all their orders, and collect thence that they are not willing to tie us so strictly to all their orders etc. I answer, 1. It is needful to be known who hath acquainted these complainants with the speeches and voices of particular men, contrary to the laws of the Classis. If I should in like disordered manner relate, and make known the particular speeches of several men, against the opinion of Mr. Davenport, what contention and trouble might arise thereupon? 2. The mind of the Classis and their willingness to tie us unto their order, is not to be collected by the speech of one, but by the general sentence and conclusion of the Classis. Any wise man may see what wrong collections these men do make. 3. The speech of this Minister is not in right manner repeated by them: for neither were his words directed unto me in the second person, neither were they uttered with such an interrogative why, by way of expostulation, to urge me to answer him. 4. This one Minister, even he yea more than many other, hath declared himself to be far from Mr. Davenport his judgement and practice; by his undertaking in writing to satisfy Mr. Davenport his objections, and scruples; who also after he had received an answer from Mr. Davenport, replied and wrote again the second time, unto which writing he received no answer from Mr. Davenport. 5. For my not observing every several custom of the Dutch Church, beside the special allowance of the Classis, which I have had in some of them, Kerckenordeningh Art. 85. I may also allege for myself the resolution of the Nationall Synod at Dort, which in things indifferent doth allow the Churches of other nations in these countries to vary from their customs. Furthermore whereas they tell again of an order, which (as they hear) I required our Elders of late to make in the Consistory about conformity to a writing of 5 Ministers, etc. I answer, 1. It would here also be demanded of these complainants, who hath been the tale-bearer of whom they have heard such things out of the Consistory concerning me. For by this and sundry the like instances, it may appear from whose suggestion and information this slanderous writing hath been made. 2. I neither did, and what need had I to seek the confirmation of that writing by a new order in our Consistory, which was already approved and confirmed by the Classis? Upon occasion of another speech, I shown it to be unreasonable, if the observation of that order, contained in that writing, should not be required of any other Minister, as well as of Mr. Davenport. 3. It is an odious and suspicious manner of relation, when they say, I got the 5 Ministers to make that writing in mine own house; when as by the motion of a Dutch Minister, & a special friend of Mr. Davenport, that was the messenger, and by the request of some of our Elders, as hath been showed before, they came unto me, and with protestation of their desire to accommodate Mr. Davenport, and to further his calling, they made that writing, and therefore came unto my house, because being weak and sickly, I could not so well go out of my house to meet them elsewhere. 4. Here also there is fit place to show the untruth of that report, which Mr. Davenport in his * Pag. 4. writing to the Classis sets down touching these 5 Ministers, viz. that upon Mr. Pagers' request alone they did in writing declare their private judgement, etc. for being come unto me in such manner as is before noted, they resolved of that course of writing their advice, not upon my motion or request, but upon the motion of one of those Ministers, which was approved by the rest. But if I had been the only seeker thereof, what cause is there for them that mean to deal uprightly to complain of such a safe and lawful course? 5. It is also a rash and presumptuous judgement, when they say of that writing, they think that no godly man will be absolutely bound unto it, as though they had power to canonize saints & godly men, and to put out of that canon all these Ministers of the Classis that confirmed it, with all such as are not of Mr. Davenport his mind in refusing to be bound unto it. Suppose also there had been error in it, yet they do not all cease to be godly men that are guilty of entertaining some such errors, and suffering themselves to be bound thereunto. complainants. SECT. XXX. THirdly, he violently without consent of any of the Consistory, bringeth matters thence to the Classis, when he cannot have his will unjustly satisfied; and so destroys the power of the Church utterly, often affirming they can do nothing in these cases without the Classis; of whom we reverently esteem for counsel and advice in all difficult matters, that cannot be ended amongst our Consistory. ANSWER. 1. IT is no act of violence, as they call it, but a just defence and refuge against violence, to refer those things to the Classis, which men conceive to be unjustly done, or unjustly delayed in the Consistory: in such cases I have done and still purpose to bring matters unto the Classis. Whereas they say, that so I destroy the power of the Church utterly, this is utterly false and a notorious slander, proceeding either from gross ignorance, or else from some worse root of bitterness, and they can never justify the same. They have made themselves plaintiffs and accusers, and from such is expected their proof, which the defendant is then to answer, when it once appeareth. Where is the warrant of W. Best, N. ja. ja. Cr. Io. Pol.? etc. where is the evidence of Ios. St. La. Co. Aug. Horse. Tho. Fl. or any of the rest? How prove they that I do utterly destroy the power of the Church hereby, why are they not ashamed to bring their bore word? 2. Mark here the folly of these complainants; they pretend to stand for the liberty of the Church, and yet seek to bring themselves into bondage. If men should stay from bringing their complaints unto the Classis, until their opposites, whether Elders or any others did consent thereunto, what a miserable servitude would this be? In the title of their complaint, they call themselves the burdened and oppressed members of the English Church, but they might then indeed call themselves burdened and groan under their burden, if the lest member in the Church being unsatisfyed in the Consistory, might not have liberty to bring their complaints to the Classis, to try where the wilfulness or the fault is. In the Brownistical title of the printed book, there is proclaimed the miserable slavery and bondage of the English Church, by reason of the tyrannical government and corrupt doctrine of Mr. john Paget, but if I should in doctrine oppugn, and in practice deny unto the members of this Church, this liberty of appeal unto the Classis, as they do here condemn it in me, than might they justly complain of tyrannical government and corrupt doctrine, than had they cause to bewail their slavery and bondage. So unwisely do they go about to pluck upon their heads that which they would seem to put away. 3. They are here again to be called upon to show what their meaning is, and what they would have men to do, when they think the Elders to be in error, and to judge unjustly in any matter. Shall men sit still and look for no redress? Or shall men bring the matter to the body of the Congregation to be debated and discussed openly before the whole multitude of the Church, according to the practice of the Brownists? Or what other course do they require? let them deal plainly, and tell us what they would have. 4. The matter of this accusation about destroying the power of the Church, and taking away the liberty thereof, for bringing matters to the Classis without consent of the Elders, is very like and of the same nature with that act and law of the Elders, and made heretofore upon occasion of the controversy about Mr. Hooker: Now seeing that act of the Elders is disannulled by the Classis, and made of no force; seeing the Classis together, with the Deputies of the Synod, have judged and decreed that this unlawful Act should be razed out of the Church-book; and seeing this sentence of the Classis hath been made known unto diverse of these complainants, as Th. Fa. Th. Fl. Tho. Ad. and others, Novem. 10. 1631. who came unto the Consistory, to inquire what the Classis had resolved, to whom it was signified, that some were deputed from the Classis to come unto the Consistory to disannul that act; and to see it canceled, this might have been a warning unto them, not to have set their hands again unto a new writing in opposition unto the Classis. For though they shown themselves discontented at that time, and not willing to rest in the resolution of the Classis, yet time and better advice might have taught them more wisdom since, both for themselves and their fellows, whom they aught to have dissuaded from such a contentious enterprise as is taken in hand by them. 5. Whereas they say they do reverently esteem of the Classis for counsel and advice in all difficult matters, etc. These words of compliment may deceive a simple reader, and happily some of the subscribers themselves that do not well understand one another's tenet. For what is this their reverend esteem? it is but a lame, halting, and half reverence, namely for their counsel and advice, but not for their authority to judge of controversies, and decide them; as they do further manifest in their next instance. Yea had they but duly esteemed of the counsel of the Classis, though they would not have submitted unto it as a sentence, yet the reverence and respect of it as an wholesome advice, might have been a means to restrain them from the offensive courses that have been taken by them. The truth is, that this pretended reverence is no more than that which Mr. jacob & his company did give to Classes and Synods, for counsel and advice. Confess. Art. 38. Yea the Brownists themselves do seem to give as much, when they confess that particular Churches are by all means convenient to have the help of one another in all needful affairs of the Church, as members of one body in the common faith, under Christ their only head. 6. Whereas Mr. Davenport himself takes up a like complaint, that I would not harken to his advice for accommodation without consent of the Classis; Book of complaints pag. 3. & 4. besides that which I have answered before, let wise men judge whether his advice was to be preferred, or was so safe for me to follow as the advice of so many godly and judicious men, consulting together in the Classis, having also a calling to judge of such matters. Book of complaints pag. 15. He saith, that he told me the bringing of it to the Classis would make matters worse; but seeing such assemblies of Ministers are therefore called together to make matters better, and to reform the worse, what reason hath he of such a speech, unless he knew of some, that meant to deal the worse, when good counsel should be given unto them? Though he say further, that some of the Dutch Ministers did approve of what he said unto me, and that matters would be worse else: I cannot believe that they did simply and absolutely speak as he writes, because I know some of them have said otherwise unto me, and had he named the Ministers, I should have known how to have given him further answer. It may be some have wished that the matter might have been ended privately, or in the Consistory, viz. by his according and agreeing with us, and that otherwise it would be worse for him, and harder for them to allow of his calling. If it was (as he saith) unlikely that the Classis would make an order in favour of him, to condemn their own customs; then was it also unlikely that the Dutch Ministers, members of the Classis, would counsel or allow any such order to be made by our Consistory for the condemning of them; then was it unlikely, unreasonable and not to have been expected of Mr. Davenport, that to gratify him, and to gratify the Brownists also, we should have made a new order to strengthen them against us in error. complainants. SECT. XXXI. FOurthly, under pretence of ask and taking advice of the Classis, he subjects the Church under their authority and power, as he calls it, though the Church never acknowledged any such power to be due, as the Scripture in any place giveth not to such a company of Ministers, nor as becometh any, except the Apostles, that could not err, to have. ANSWER. FIrst, it is untrue which they do here again repeat, that I subject the Church under the power of the Classis, especially speaking of an undue power as they do. 2. This accusation (being the same in effect with some of the former, for whatsoever show of method is made herein, yet are the parts of their divisions diverse times confounded) is not so much or not more against me, then against all the Ministers of these Reformed Churches, and the discipline that is exercised by them. If the subjection of this Church unto the Classis, will prove that I do not behave myself as becometh a Pastor in the government of the Church, for which end it is alleged of these accusers; then may every one of these Ministers, in this regard, be in like manner accused of not behaving themselves as becometh Pastors, seeing the Churches whereof they are Pastors, are as much subjected under the power of the Classis, as is this of ours. And if this power of the Classis were taken away by them, than should a principal part of their Church-government be taken away, and their discipline overthrown: And not only here, but in the Churches of Scotland, France, Geneva, etc. where the like power and authority of Classical Assemblies, as the special bond of union, and sinew of government hath been established and practised. 3. It is another injury, when they say I subject the Church under the authority of the Classis, under pretence of ask and taking advice of the Classis: for that which men do under a pretence, that they seek to do covertly, and not to be seen therein. Men use to hide themselves and their meanings under the veil of pretences; but as for me, I have always and do still openly profess, the authority & power of Synods and Classis, to be lawful and necessary, as well as their counsel and advice: I do in like manner pretend the one as well as the other, and not one under the other. 4. Whereas they speak of our subjection to this power of the Classis, that the Church never acknowledged any such power to be due, etc. this is a plain falsehood. The English that first made suit; the Dutch Ministers that furthered the suit; the Magistrates that granted the suit, did all agree in this, to have such an English Church as should accord with the Dutch, in the same order of discipline & government, and be as the Dutch. Since my first coming, which was at the first erecting of this Church, I was admitted to be a member of their Classis, with ordinary subscription and promise of union with them. Both I and the Elders ever since as they were deputed thereunto by the Consistory, have from time to time, even unto this present, appeared in the Classis, in the same manner that others did, and both by submission unto their resolutions, and by actual exercise of the same liberty and power, in giving our voices equally with them, have so acknowledged the authority of Classical assemblies to be lawful and just. Those that are received for members of this Congregation, and are newly added to the Church from one communion to another, do not only make profession of the same faith with us, but do also by solemn promise, covenant to submit unto the discipline of this Church, according to the rule of Christ. And being admitted, diverse have upon occasion resorted unto the Classis, and have submitted unto their authority, for the judgement of such causes and controversies, about which there hath been question among us. The many Brownists that have come unto us, leaving their separation, were never received nor admitted to come with any protest against this power of the Classis, and subjection thereunto. Th. Fa. of old, when he was received of the Dutch Church and since of us, and Th. Ad. with St. Of. Ed. Ph. and Ed. Sc. of later times, which now with other subscribers do complain of the undue power of the Classis, had as much reason to have protested against this power at their first admission to the Church. For howsoever the acts and sentences proceeding from this power, have been multiplied on sundry occasions; yet the power itself, and the authority of the Classis, was the same at first, and no other than it is now. Among many other evidences, there is one pregnant testimony hereof, upon occasion of an English Synod, which Mr. Forbes in special laboured to have erected in these Countries: For when he urged us many ways to have joined with them, we for many weighty reasons being unwilling thereunto, did in the name of Ministers, Elders and Deacons, with the liking also of sundry of our people acquainted with this business, declare and testify, both unto Magistrates and the Synod, that as we had no will, so we had no power to withdraw or disjoin ourselves from the Classis, with which we were combined as members of the same, without their consent: and by this testification their power was then acknowledged of us. To omit other things in so plain a case, consider we but one testimony of one of these my accusers, who though (forgetting himself) he hath subscribed unto this protest against the power and authority of the Classis, yet hath he of late given great approbation thereof. Sto. Ofw. in his book against the Brownists, having said that it is far from the true Church to admit of disorders, Heady & rash Censures p. 29. though that be not always true, seeing many true Churches are often defiled with much disorder, and may not therefore be accounted false Churches, yet that which follows is both true, and directly against this accusation, which himself & others have made. Speaking of an holy order observed at Geneva, and in particular how every Church is to use the censures appointed by Christ, he tells how they have their meetings of Ministers and Elders, some less and some greater, some monthly, some yearly, even just according to the order of Classical and Synodical meetings in these Countries; and this also as he saith, for to give definitive sentence, and for deciding of matters. Now these things being acts of power and authority, and more than counsel and advice, and they commended of him for it, who would think he should be so carried away with the whirlwind, as to subscribe to the contrary with these complainants, and to reproach me for subjecting this Church to such a power, which had been so lately commended of himself? 5. Their insolency in accusing is so much the greater, in that they do still leave their proofs behind them. They say touching the power of the Classical assemblies, that it is such as the Scriptures do not in any place give to such a company of Ministers: but they do not allege any one place of Scripture to condemn the same. Though I for my part have in my sermons diverse times alleged sundry evidences and grounds of holy Scripture, for proof and maintenance of such authority as is exercised by Synods and Classis; yet now being so vehemently and heinously accused by these complainants, I wait for their arguments and proofs, which hitherto have not appeared. They are false accusers until they have justified their charge. It is enough for the defendant or party accused, then to give answer when arguments are brought against him. But these complainants might yet have seen themselves contradicted by their forenamed fellow-complaynant St. Ofw. who brings a remarkable place of Scripture to warrant the exercise of that power, Act. 15. which here they deny. He allegeth that when a controversy arose at Antioch, they sent to jerusalem for to bring the Church there unto unity and order, which the Apostles performed; Than he addeth immediately, and the like do the Reformed Churches here and in France, and at Geneva. Now if the Churches here do practise and exercise a power, so as was done at Antioch and jerusalem, and by Apostolical direction, then is not their power an undue power, nor the Churches unjustly subjected thereunto. This one allegation is sufficient to evince the falsehood of their assertion. 6. It is also false and absurd, which they say touching the authority of the Classis, that it is such as doth not become any, except the Apostles, that could not err, to have: But it is the less marvel that these men do speak on this manner, when as they see Mr. Davenport himself going before them, and using a much like speech in his letter to the Classis, touching his consent required to the writing of the 5 Ministers, namely, Book of complaints and pag. 5. that such a subjection is greater than may be yielded unto any Council, whether of Classis or Synods, etc. that thereby the writings and decrees of men are made infallible, and equal with the Word of God, which is intolerable. But what wise man is there that sees not the strange folly and vanity of such assertions as these? Is no truth uttered or described by men in our times, whereunto the consent of men may be required, because there be now no Apostles? Do not all Reformed Churches at this day require a subscription unto their confessions of faith in the several articles thereof? Do they hereby make their writings of equal authority with the Word of God, and themselves equal to the Apostles that could not err? It is far from them. Neither Mr. Davenport, nor these complainants, shall ever be able to justify these slanderous complaints. Nay if this were true, how could Mr. Davenport subscribe his name unto his own writing sent unto the Classis, to show his consent unto it? Did he thereby make himself an Apostle or his writing equal with the Word of God? Why may we not show our consent, and subscribe to other writings of men, upon persuasion of the truth so appearing unto us, as well as he subscribed to his own? They are so far from proving these assertions, that they offer not to go about it; we acknowledge there is no judicatory on earth, either civil or Ecclesiastical, either of Consistory, Classis, or Synod, but they are subject to error: when that error is showed by the Word of God, it aught to be corrected. This also is their practice, one Synod often reforming that which hath been decreed by another. Yet doth not this take away their authority for the judgement and deciding of controversies. For by such reasoning they might take away all government, and bring in confusion. By these and suchlike injurious speeches, they do exceedingly gratify many sorts of Libertines, Arrians, Socinians and other Herericks, which do therefore so much abhor the subscriptions required in the Churches of God, because they serve for detection and discovery of their errors. But as the preaching of the Word is not therefore to be condemned, because some preach error; so are not subscriptions and that consent, which is required to many truths, therefore to be rejected, though some do unjustly urge subscription unto errors. 7. Observe here also the inexcusable partiality of these complainants, who accuse me for subjecting the Church under the authority of the Classis, and yet frame no such complaint against the Elders of this Church, which (whatsoever some of their opinions have been or are) yet have they all of them by their practice acknowledged the authority and power of the Classis, where they have sit with others, and have exercised as much authority as any member of the Classis, by giving their voices for deciding, judging and determining of any controversy, or cause that was brought unto them, as well as the rest. Hereby men may learn the better what to judge of this their writing. Having heard their complaints in respect of the whole Church's power and liberty, the Elders power in government, and the authority of the Classis, let us now hear what their complaint is in respect of the particular members thereof. complainants. SECT. XXXII. FOurthly, he doth not the duty of a Pastor to the particular members of the Congregation, which we prove after this manner. First, when godly persons make their complaints of those that walk disorderly, and that the censures are not executed upon offenders, they that seek the good of the Church, are checked and discouraged by him. ANSWER. 1. THis accusation is false and slanderous. My desire and endeavour from my first calling unto this place, hath been and is, that the vigour of discipline may be maintained in our Church; and according to my power, I have laboured that the censures might be executed in due manner, for discouragement, not of the godly, but of the ungodly and offenders; and as well against the richer as the poorer sort, without acception of persons. When care and zeal is showed in the administration of discipline, commonly the persons reproved and censured are displeased and discontented: they and their friends do often murmur and complain, and by themselves & by their instruments great troubles are raised up in the Church. And it comes to pass sometimes that the Ministers of Christ are never more reproached for unrighteous dealing, then when they have done most righteously and zealously in the censure of offenders. 2. This accusation is partial. For seeing the rebukes and censures of offenders are not concluded nor executed, but by the most voices and consent at lest of the greatest part of the Eldership: if wrong and injustice have been committed, then if not all, yet the greatest part must be guilty. And what partiality is this, to frame an accusation against me alone, and to complain of me alone, and to require of me that I alone should answer for that, which others have done with me? This shows with what conscience they have proceeded in this work. 3. This accusation is contradictory to that testimony, which the chief of these complainants themselves have given of me in their protestation unto the Classis, with so great commendation both of my life and doctrine, and in such a measure that they desired no better Pastor, and this in the name of Elders, Deacons, and other members of the Church, upon occasion of the controversy concerning Mr. Hooker. Hereby they make themselves guilty and trespassers against the truth. If then they spoke without flattery, as they professed; how can they now speak without slander, touching my injustice in this kind, without some new evidence thereof. 4. This accusation is most disordered, for if such evils have been committed by me in the Eldership, why did not these accusers seek redress at the same time? Or if they could get no redress in the Eldership, why did they not complain to the Classis? Or if they would not subject the affairs of the Church unto the undue power of the Classis, as they call it, why did they not then bethink themselves of some other form of discipline, that might have afforded them more redress of evils? Or if they had now just cause to abstain from the communion, for Mr. Davenport his cause, until they had testified against evil, why had they not as just reason then? What good can be expected to ensue upon such disordered and unconscionable courses? 5. This accusation can with less reason be made by these men, then by many others. For if there have been a failing in the Eldership, for not censuring of offenders (and what governor's of the Church, even the godlyest, do not sometimes fail?) then hath it been in the not censuring of the offences of some of these complainants. For example, William Bast, the foreman of the subscribers, and the publisher of that scandalous pamphlet of complaints against me, hath given great offence, and is become an evil example unto many, by the open violation of the Sabbath in his own house, and by his resorting unto the assembly of the Remonstrants'. He hath been admonished by me, and in the name of the Eldership, and hath justly deserved further censure. With what face can he complain that the censures are not executed upon offenders? Why doth not this complainant awaken his own frozen and benumbed conscience, to consider better of his own ways, before he take up stones to cast at others? Tho. Flet. another of these complainants hath heretofore caused great disturbance in our Church, by the disordered and offensive courses taken by him. For (as hath been noted before) when he sought to hinder the calling of Mr. Balmford, and to discourage him from coming unto us, he then went about from house to house, with a catalogue of names to get and gather the consent, not only of men, but of women and maids also, as if they had had power to give voices in the election of Ministers, and being admonished of this scandal by the Eldership, he yet refused to acknowledge his fault therein. If we have failed in censuring offenders, surely there is much cause to remember our remissness towards him. And not he only, but other of these complainants that were importunate in his behalf, have reason to consider their own guiltiness in that which they unjustly impute unto me. For notwithstanding this great disorder of Tho. Fl. which the Elders would have taken into further consideration, yet A.H. H.D. Io. Po. ja. Cr. Io. St. D.B. and others, coming to the Consistory the evening before the Lord's Supper, were urgent to have a present end without further delay, though Th. Fl. would not acknowledge this his fault, signifying that otherwise they were not willing for this time to come to the communion. This was such an act of violent dealing, in hindering the just censure of offenders and disordered persons, as I do not remember the like since the Church was first erected. They were so earnest in the business by threatening a kind of schism, that it was thought good by the Eldership, together with the Deacons, to give place unto the importunity of these brethren, and for that time to let pass that which was passed; having first showed what their duty was in such cases, and always reserving our liberty to witness the truth, and to deal against such errors and disorders hereafter, as occasion should be given. Moreover, what is it that more hinders the due administration of discipline, causing that the censures are not executed upon such as walk disorderly, then when there is a conspiracy and combination of many persons together in some evil enterprise? It is commonly observed among men, that the multitude of offenders procures impunity of offences. If men that walk disorderly, would device how to break down the wall of discipline, and free themselves from censure, what readier course could they take, then to band themselves in companies, and so to rush forward in their ways, and to discourage and weaken the hands of such governor's of the Church, as should correct their disorders? Now this is the very practice of these complainants in this their present enterprise, in this their injurious writing: for here they join hand in hand, they set name by name, and who shall now stay them? This consociation in evil makes them in a high degree guilty of that very thing they complain of in this article. Hereby they strengthen and harden one another in sin. Hereby others are seduced and drawn away, to follow their course, as is noted in the end of the printed book. And while they walk so disorderly, how can the censures without great difficulty be executed? Prov. 16.5. & 27.17. Yet let these remember the word of the Lord, though hand join in hand, the offenders shall not be unpunished. complainants. SECT. XXXIII. SEcondly, when some have been suspended from the Lords Table, they may live many years and die in their sins, before he looks after them to reclaim them. ANSWER. 1. THe admonition of suspended persons is performed either in the Consistory, when they are sent for thither, or when some are deputed out of the Consistory to go unto them; or when they are upon occasion spoken unto by one alone. And each of these ways have I many a time and often admonished such persons, that they might be reclaimed, and neither live nor die in their sins. 2. Seeing suspended persons are ordinarily often admonished before their suspension, the admonition which belongs unto them most properly, is in the Eldership, after that more private admonition hath been despised of them. If this duty have been neglected in the Eldership, what partiality is it in these accusers, to complain of me alone, for that thing which concerns the rest of the Elders, when as they know not which of us be most faulty therein? 3. There is also a difference to be put betwixt suspended persons: some of them being more tractable and ready to hear; others more obstinate, and ready to rend those that admonish them with reproaches and railings. And the Scripture shows that we are not so much bound to admonish the one sort as the other; lest the name of God should be taken in vain, and his holy things despised as well as we rend. 4. The order agreed upon in the Consistory, is this, that in cases of admonition those Elders or Ministers, in whose quarter the persons to be admonished do devil, are ordinarily to be employed therein before others. Neither do I know that in my quarter any suspended persons have remained without admonition by me. And it is unreasonable to blame me for that, which hath been neglected in another's quarter. 5. If any of these complainants had at any time discerned, or thought that there was a defect or neglect of duty, in regard of any one suspended person, and that there was special need of admonishing such an one; had there been a Christian consideration of their duty in such case, they might have been led thereby, either to have advertised me thereof in private, or to have signified it unto the Eldership, and to have required their further care therein, at lest before they had made such a scandalous protestation to the offence of many. 6. I have the less encouragement to the performance of this work, through the fault of some of these my accusers, and to give instance hereof; A certain person of our Church being suspended for profaning the Lordsday, and being admonished of this scandal, hath this answer in readiness; why do you not as well suspend such and such persons, and by name William. Best, for his open Shop upon the Sabbath-day? Thus is this accusers evil example a stumbling block to many, and though the others fault is in a higher degree, and therefore is suspended rather than he, yet even that which is done by him also is very offensive, both for strengthening of others in sin, and for weakening of us, that should admonish the suspended person. complainants. SECT. XXXIV. THirdly, the visiting of members at their houses is so far neglected, that not only diverse members were never once visited by him in diverse years, but also the visitation of the members against the Sacrament is wholly left off. ANSWER. 1. FOr visitation of the sick, it is a duty wherein by the blessing of God, I have had much comfort in ministering of comfort unto others; and therefore have been careful to perform the same, according to my power and above my power, both to rich & poor, to English and Dutch, to the members of the Church, and to them that are no members of the Church, to such as were diseased in body, and to such as have been afflicted in mind. My labour & weariness in going from one side of the City to another upon this occasion, hath been such, that thereupon I have evidently and sensibly fallen into great sickness. And where more danger was, being called thereunto, I have not refused to visit many visited with the Pest, to comfort them in the time of their anguish: Yea in the most infectious places, as where in one poor family, the floor hath been covered with death, some persons being already dead of the plague, and some ready to give up the ghost, lying so thick on the ground, that I could scarcely set my foot beside them, being six of them in one small room, 3 dead, and 3 dying upon their pallets; yet have I with cheerfulness and comfort gone among them, to exhort them, to pray with them, and to minister the consolations of Christ unto them as need required. And though in regard of weakness, I am not able to do so much as I have done; though my strength be less, yet I purpose and hope that my care shall be more, and when I cannot go faster, yet to creep forth for performance of this duty. Whereas by the favour of the Magistrates there are maintained in this City certain Siecken-troosters, or Comforters of the sick, for assistance of the Dutch Ministers, to supply their place in visiting of the sick, especially when contagious and pestilential diseases do abound, and thereby the Ministers of the Dutch Church are excused and eased of a great part of their burden, labour and danger in visiting of the sick; yet have I not sought any such help for my excuse in this behalf, but have alone willingly undergone the burden hereof. Had these complainants well considered of the matter, they would rather have themselves become Siecken-troasters, to supply what was wanting in me, Mat. 25.36 43. etc. jam. 1.27. 1. Thes. 5.14. then in so scandalous manner to have reproached and accused me; it being also the duty of every particular Christian, to be a visitor and comforter of the sick, and especially it might have been expected of some of these complainants, that have taken upon them so much, even more than they aught in preaching and expounding the Scriptures, when they were not lawfully called thereunto. 2. For visitation of members before the Lord's Supper, though I have duly and ordinarily in former times observed it, yet upon the death of Mr. Pot my fellow-minister, and faithful fellow-labourer in the Lord, the Elders of our Church took upon them to free me from that labour, by visiting the members at such time, until another Minister might be provided, which was then hoped would be no long time. When I then intermitted that visitation, it was not that I might live in idleness, for my labour was double to that it was before, by preaching as many sermons, as both he and I together did before; and withal visited sick persons upon occasion as I could. This being continued for 2 years after his death, at length through infirmity of body, rheums, and hoarseness of voice, I was forced to leave some exercises, as that sermon on Wednesdays, and that before the Lord's Supper, preaching only twice on the Lordsday. After this I had also long sicknesses with many troubles, so that my weakness is now very great, and will not permit to endure such travel in visiting as I have done. Common humanity might have taught my accusers to have considered these things, and so not to have been so immodest and unreasonable in reproaching of me. 3. As for this solemn visitation of members before the Lords-Supper, seeing it doth not appear from the Scriptures, that it was any express or immediate ordinance of God, yea or that it could be well practised in the primitive Church, when as it seems they did celebrated the Lords Supper so frequently, Act. 2.42. and even every Lordsday, they aught for this cause also to have been more sparing in their accusation. Otherwise, where communions are not so frequent, I acknowledge that there is profitable use thereof, and my purpose also is as the Lord shall enable me to observe the same. 4. For that they speak of diverse members never once visited by me in diverse years, that might also well be, and yet without any fault of mine. For seeing the City where we live, is large and great, and the members of our Church scattered here and there throughout the same in many streets, lanes and corners thereof, it was therefore by order and agreement among ourselves divided into diverse quarters, which were to be visited and attended upon, each knowing his own quarter, that none might be left unvisited by one or other. And what wonder then, if those members of the Church, which dwelled in an other quarter, were never visited by me, that had my station and special watch-assigned unto me in an other place? And thus it is also with the Dutch Ministers in their visitations of their people, whose order we follow herein. 5. For visitation of the sick, jam. 5.14. seeing it is a duty which the Holy Ghost hath in special manner laid upon the Elders of the Church; seeing my care and diligence in performance of this duty, hath not been inferior unto the care of the Elders; seeing many members of the Church do more complain of the negligence of the Elders in this regard; this shows how partially and unconscionably these complainants have framed their accusation in blameing me alone, which yet have had as just excuse as our Elders, of whom they do not here utter any one word of complaint at all. 6. It is also to be remembered touching the visitation of the sick, that the Apostle exhorts those that are sick to call for the Elders of the Church, that they may pray for them, etc. For being called for, jam. 5.14. they may with more comfort undertake the work. And this direction of calling for them, aught at lest to prevail so far with men, as to stay them from contumelious reproach of the Ministers, until they have called or sent for them. And had this been thought of by these complainants, it might have stayed them from accusing of me, who (if it were possible) never (to my knowledge) refused to visit any that called for me, whether in my quarter or of an other; whether members of the Church or not. 7. That which should encourage a Minister unto the visitation of the sick, is the peaceable entertainment which he findeth when he comes unto them. There be houses that are houses of strife, and some sick persons that are sick of strife, when their desire and will is no satisfied. The visitation of such doth sometimes exasperated the unreasonable passion of impatient strife, Prov. 29.17. and therefore as the Lord warneth all men to withdraw their foot from their neighbour's house, when there is fear and danger, that visitation may occasion hatred and indignation, Luke 10.6. even so Ministers also are directed of Christ, to have respect unto this rule of conversation, by observing where the children of peace do devil, and disposing their way accordingly. And in such cases a Minister aught to be excused, if he visit not so often as otherwise he would. 8. For the visitation of the members of the Church before the Lord's Supper, I have not had so much encouragement thereunto of later time as formerly I have had. For seeing our manner and order is, that Ministers and Elders go together about this work, and seeing some of the Elders have declared, both by word and practice, that they are of Mr. Davenport his mind, touching some of these controversyes, that have been so offensive among us; if any of these Elders going with me in this visitation, we should find some members of the Church, which signify unto us that they are also of Mr. Davenport his judgement, and say that they are troubled in conscience about these things, and require resolution of their doubts; what is now to be done? I labour to show him Mr. Davenport his error; The Elder with me (if he deal in conscience according to his profession) labours to maintain Mr. Davenport his opinion, and to resist me in this visitation. If on the contrary we meet with such of our people, as dislike the judgement & practice of Mr. Davenport, and tell how they are offended with such as do oppugn the discipline and order of these Reformed Churches, and require the Elder to show warrant of his opinion, wherein he takes part with Mr. Davenport; If hereupon this Elder begin to plead for Mr. Davenport, what could I do in conscience but pled against him, and witness the truth whereof I am persuaded, and so oppose the Elder going with me? And what trouble then was to be expected in this visitation? Lastly, besides the former kinds of visitation in time of sickness, and before the Lords Supper, there is an other kind of more ordinary visitation of members of the Church, when according to the bond of Christian communion and fellowship, those that are neighbours and friends do meet together, especially when the poorer families, the fatherless and the widows are visited in their wants. It is not enough sometimes to visit the houses of the poor, unless the poor be allowed to visit us, unless by a loving and kind invitation they be called unto us; if there be not, as the H. Ghost speaks, Esa. 58.10. a pouring out of the soul unto them in familiar conference and conversation together. This duty I have endeavoured according to my power to perform, and that with cheerfulness & singleness of heart. This course of visitation hath been duly and constantly observed by me, neither do I know that ever any week hath passed for more than 20 years together, wherein some or other, more or less, have not been thus visited by me, if not by my going to them or otherwise, yet at lest by their coming unto my house, if sickness or a journey, or some other necessity did not hinder, and that to this end, that we might rejoice together in the Lord, and that we might communicate together in the gifts of God, for our mutual comfort, both theirs and mine. I should have abhorred to speak so much of myself, but that my importunate accusers have compelled me by these complaints: and in such case many men of God have not refused to do the like. complainants. SECT. XXXV. FOurthly, whereas it was desired that the weekly sermons on Wednesdays, and those usual before the Sacrament, should again be begun, and assistance hath been offered him therein without his charge at lest; he neither would perform them himself, nor suffer any other we could get to do it, though the Eldership agreed it should be so. ANSWER. FIrst it is untrue which they say concerning the weekly sermons on Wednesdays, that the Eldership agreed, that upon my refusal any other they could get should do it. It was agreed by the Eldership, that Mr. Davenport should be spoken unto for his assistance therein, but no agreement for any other. This is evident from their own act thereof. 2. It is also untrue which they writ of the Elderships' agreement, that any other they could get should do it. In one sentence they are guilty of double untruth, as before there was an untruth in regard of the persons to be got, so here another untruth in respect of the persons by whom they should be got. For this had been most unreasonable, that it should have been referred unto these complainants to get whom they could. This had been many ways against good order. 3. As for Mr. Davenport his preaching in that manner, before we were assured of his accord with us, it had been a mean to nourish & continued strife in the Congregation; a means to delay and hinder the calling of another Minister, as I shown before in answer to their complaint, which is here idly repeated. 4. Although Mr. Davenport had before offered his assistance in preaching, if the Eldership should desire it, and although the Elders did agreed, and conclude for Mr. Davenport, and thereupon deputed some to speak unto him about his assistance in preaching on the week days, and to entreat him to begin with the preparatory Sermon on Saturday next following, etc. yet even they themselves or Mr. Davenport, or both, seeing the inconveniences and danger that might ensue thereupon, did not proceed to put their rash agreement in execution, but (as it seemeth) thought it best to surcease, at lest until a better occasion. 5. Whereas they speak of assistance offered unto me without my charge at lest, this was but a vain offer: for as on the other side I needed not to be at any charge for such assistance, so had it been an unreasonable thing, if in regard of freedom from cost and charges, I should have consented to such a course of assistance, which I conceived to be against the peace of our Church. 6. Suppose their offered assistance had not been the lest charge unto me, yet might it have been a very great charge unto the Church, if they had paid for it according to the proportion of that collect, that was made for Mr. Davenport, and therefore worthy of consideration in that regard. 7. Whereas they say further of these weekly sermons, that I would neither perform them myself, nor suffer, etc. they know, or may know well enough, that I did perform those weekly Sermons myself alone, both diverse years before the coming of Mr. Pot, and after his death for two years together, whiles my health and strength permitted, and this without any charge at all unto the Church. complainants. SECT. XXXVI. FOr his doctrine, we have much against it: but to let pass his sleight Sermons, which be many for a man of his Abilities. ANSWER. HAving answered their manifold slanders, touching my behaviour in the government of the Church, let us now hear what they have to object against my doctrine. And here playing the Rhetoricians, they make a show of passing by some fault, which they do not reckon in the number of those particulars that follow. They seem I say, by a mincing figure of extenuation, to let a fault pass, which yet they do not. They are content to have somethings, which are no light matters, nor of small reproach, to be reckoned for small in comparison, and to let pass the proof of them; that so these things, which they profess to stand upon, may be imagined to be the greater and the more heinous. But here they do not let pass this lighter fault, without a threefold reproach, 1. that my Sermons be sleight; 2. that these sleight Sermons be many. 3. They aggravate it, that this is done by a man of my abilities. For the sleightness of my Sermons, I answer, 1. This accusation is slanderous, they have not offered to prove it, neither can they do it. Whatsoever my weakness is, yet the doctrines, exhortations, consolations, delivered in my Sermons, being drawn by just consequence from the word of truth, contain in them the wisdom of God, and the power of God unto salvation, and therefore not to be slighted. Whatsoever infirmities have appeared in my delivery of this word, they aught from thence to have taken occasion of glorifying God, who perfecteth his power in man's weakness, 2. Cor. 9.12. and will therefore have the treasure of his Gospel to be carried forth in earthen vessels, and the excellent pearl of the knowledge of Christ, to be kept in * 2. Cor. 4.7 oystershelles, or vessels made thereof, as the Greek words import, that the excellency of that power might be of God, and not of the Ministers. For as there is a huge difference of price betwixt the base oysters, and the costly pearls that are found therein; so the infinite price and virtue of the Evangelicall pearl is the more to be acknowledged, being found in the ministry of frail humane shells. 2. No marvel that I should be slighted of them, when the most holy Apostles, 2. Cor. 10.10. Esa. 53.3. Luke 9.22. joh. 10.20. when Paul himself was slighted, as a man whose bodily presence was weak, and his speech contemptible, or of no value; they complained of him for his sleight Sermons. Even Christ himself was slighted and rejected of men, made as nothing, esteemed as a mad man, and not to be heard. 3. It is the less marvel that I should be thus slighted by some of these complainants, that do magnify themselves, and have set up themselves to be preachers in their ordinary meetings, where diverse members of sundry families have met together to hear them, and this without allowance of the Church. It seems the sermons of Tho. Flet. ja. Cr. and others, have been so excellent, that they themselves, and other of these complainants, that have been their hearers, do so esteem thereof, that my Sermons, in comparison of theirs, are but slight Sermons. May I not say to these accusers, as the Apostle once to some among the Corinthians, 1. Cor. 4.8.10. Now ye are full, now ye are rich, etc. we are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ, we are weak, ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised. Ye are eminent men, and we are slight teachers. For the number of my sleight Sermons, which they will have to be many: I leave it to the judgement of unpartial hearers of me. And if need be, I am ready to submit the trial of any of them to the judgement of the learned, having the notes of them all by me. Had these maintainers given an instance but of any one Sermon, and shown wherein the sleightness thereof did consist, I might then have given a more full answer unto them. For my Abilities, which they odiously allege, to aggravate my fault, as if through sloathfullnes and idleness, I had done the work of the Lord negligently; I answer, that Abilities are either of body or mind. For my Ability of body, it is very small, and when I was in the strength of my age, I was but a weak man. But now through age and labour, and much sickness, my strength is exceedingly decayed, and my weakness augmented. Yet in this weakness I have laboured above my ability and strength of body, both in study and in speaking with extension of voice, so that I have thereupon fallen into further sickness, and sensibly discerned an increase of my weakness. And being much troubled with an infirmity of hoarseness, the things that are spoken with a low, weak and hoarse voice, seem unto some to be weak and slight, even to such as regard a sound of words, more than soundness of matter. And for Ability of mind, it depends in some part upon the Ability of body: Eccl. 12.12 for when the body is not so able to endure the labour of study, of writing and reading, which are a weariness unto the flesh, then is the mind less furnished through want of study. Again, heaviness in the heart of man bringeth it down; and so the mind is weakened. Now whether many of these complainants have not sought so much as in them lies, to make me dejected with heaviness, let any judge that reads this their writing, and hears of their other behaviour suitable thereunto. And let themselves think whether they be not guilty of giving occasion, that I should make the slighter Sermons; considering what the Apostle testifieth, Heb. 13.17 that it is unprofitable for the people to make their Ministers sorrowful. As for me, my desire hath been, and my resolution is, not to hide my Talon in a napkin, but through the grace of God (by which I am that I am) according to my ability, to employ the same to the good of God's Church, hoping at length with the faithful servants to enter into my Master's joy. complainants. SECT. XXXVII. FIrst his selfpreaching and mis-applying of holy truths, which hath been done with such bitterness of late, that some of us are discouraged from hearing him, and all of us are sent home with sad hearts, when those of his side are made glad and insult; who pretend to cleave to Mr. Paget, out of their enmity against us, and those ways of godliness, wherein we desire and endeavour to walk. ANSWER. IN this their first exception against my doctrine, behold an heap of slanders couched together. First, they accuse me of selfpreaching; but they do not tell wherein this selfpreaching doth consist. Had they done it, they might have been more fully refuted. Men preach themselves, when they do unlawfully seek their own profit, pleasure or preferment thereby. I have not in my doctrine used any coloured covetousness to get gain, or to extort any thing by contributions or collections from them. I have not sought theirs, but them. I have not prophesied of wine & strong-drinke, nor preached to this end that I might be entertained with feasting and banquet●●●● I 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 gloriously 〈◊〉 the praise of humane eloquence and learning, by alleging th● speeches & sentences of Poets, Philosophers, or Fathers, nor Greek and Latin language, to amaze the hearers by such vain ostentation: Neither have I vented new conceits or opinions of mine own, to please men, or to get honour to myself by such doctrines. Neither do I know any other reasonable pretence for such a slander. 2. It is another slander, when they say, I misapply holy truths. They say it, but they do not name any one truth misapplyed by me; much less do they prove it. 3. An other slander is, that I use such bitterness. And yet they allege no one bitter speech or doctrine uttered by me. If it be enough to accuse, who shall be innocent? 4. That some of them should be discouraged from hearing me, and all of them sent home with sad hearts, it doth not appear by the behaviour of diverse of them. The trial of their countenance testifieth against them; neither do these complainants give instance of any one speech of mine, whereby a godly heart might be either discouraged, or unjustly made sad in heart. And yet we know there is a godly sadness of heart; and it is a blessed thing for the hearers of God's Word, to be sent home sometimes with such sadness of heart: such sorrow is the seed of joy, and far better is such sadness of heart, than that madness of heart, whereby some spurning against the Word of God, do break out into contemptuous and scornful gestures, laughing, giering, winking and nodding at others, and pour out reproaches against their Ministers at home and abroad. If any be pricked in their consciences, 2. Cor. 7.9.10. I desire it may be a godly sorrow, leading unto repentance, not to be repent of. I desire not that any be sent home with such a sadness and indignation of spirit, 1. Kings 20 43. as was that of wicked Ahab, when upon the rebuke of the Prophet, he returned so heavily to his house. And for my comfort, I look unto jesus Christ, who was yet worse dealt withal, when not some but many even of his Disciples taking offence at his doctrine, joh. 6.60.61.67. as if no man could bear his hard sayings, and as if they had been discouraged from hearing of him, went back and walked no more with him. 5. Whereas they speak of some persons, whom they call those of my side; thereby they give to understand the evil whereof they be authors, in making two sides or factions in the Church. Whereas 〈…〉 progressed agreement with me, both in doctrine and discipline, and for aught I knew we were all one, both among ourselves and with the Dutch Churches, it seems that there is now (as if Christ were divided) a division in the Church: some of Mr. Davenport his side, as these complainants show themselves, and some other whom they call those of my side. For my part, I abhor this siding; I desire to walk in the old beaten path of that discipline and government, practised by these Reformed Churches, and established in their Classis and Synods. They that stand for innovation, and seek to shake of the government by the Classis, and deny the authority thereof, are guilty of this offensive siding among us. 6. It is a further slander, when they accuse those that cleave unto me, for their enmity, not only against them, but even against the ways of godliness, wherein they desire to walk. This is a very heinous charge, which I know not how ever they can justify. And what and how many are those special ways of godliness, wherein these complainants endeavour to walk? Why did they not in particular rehearse them as plain dealing required, that their meaning might be known? 7. How disordered a thing is it, to accuse diverse of their brethren, members of the Church with them, and to blot the Church with this reproach, and neither to show the persons that are to be admonished, nor yet the particular sins whereof they are to be admonished? Why might they not have complained of them to the Elders, as well as to heap up so many complaints against me? But their partiality is evident on each side. They complain of me by name, and of these without name. Lastly, if those ways of godliness, wherein they desire and endeavour to walk, be those different practices, wherein some of them have walked, as namely sometimes to leave our exercises, and the worship of God with us, and to go unto the exercise of the Brownists, and to hear them: and beside this to have a new exercise of prophecy among themselves in worse manner, than the Brownists themselves, who allow no such meetings of their people apart from the Church; if these or the like practices be those ways of godliness, whereof they boast, then have they no just cause to complain, though many of the Church do oppose and dislike their course, that is unwarrantable. Yea it is much to be doubted, that these complainants do not 〈◊〉 themselves, touching these practise● and therefore I would 〈◊〉 of some of them, as of Will. Best, L●●, C●●. Au. Hor. Ios. S●●. Tho. Fa. Ham. Den. N. ja. Goe B●. whether they do unfeignedly desire, and endeavour to walk in these ways of godliness, as sometimes to hear the sermons of the Brownists, sometimes to hear the sermons of Tho. Flet. and ja. Cr. and to tread in the steps of Tho. Ad. and Hen. Pull. that have frequented these ways; yea whether they accounted these ways lawful and warrantable. complainants. SECT. XXXVIII. SEcondly, for his taking of text of purpose, fit to stir up contention, as of late that of the 5 of Isaiah, about the vineyard; upon which 5 first verses, he hath taught a great while, which with what bitterness he hath taught against the godly, many passages and members will witness, and insinuating things against us, which we never thought of, making us vile before the whole Congregation, and to be insulted over by unworthy terms from those of his side, to our great grief and continual vexation, and 10 days since, strained the 5 verse, which tells what God will do to his vineyard, and spoke altogether of men's disorders in the Church, etc. ANSWER. THeir second exception against my doctrine, is for taking a text fit to stir up contention, etc. Hereunto I answer, Psal. 12.6. & 19.7. 1. There is no text of H. Scripture that is fit to stir up contention, seeing every word of God is pure and perfect, and hath in itself no fitness at all to be applied unto evil, but unto good only. All applying of any text of Scripture unto contention and error, is only from the corruption of man, and deceitfulness of Satan, in perverting the Scripture; and so there is no text of Scripture whatsoever, but it may be perverted and abused unto error and contention, ●. P●t. 3.16 as well as this fifth of Isaiah. And therefore howsoever these complainants shall se●ke to excuse their speech, yet can they not be without blame in such a broad and lose kind of expression. This accusation not only of my doctrine, but of the very text itself for my sake, is not unlike to the accusation made against a certain Minister in England, lately related unto me by a friend. This Minister was complained of in a Bishop's court, concerning the doctrine which he had preached, and to aggravate the complain, it was said, My Lord, the very text which he chose is Puritanical. But the Bishop reproving the complainant, wished him to abstain from accusing the text itself: and this might serve for a just rebuke of these my accusers, that do so overreach in striking at me. 2. This text of Isaiah the fifth touching the vineyard, is so far from being fit to stir up contention, that on the contrary it is very fit for the repressing of contention, and for the reproof of contentious persons. This may be observed in special, both from the blessing of the vineyard, to have an hedge, vers. 2. and from the desolation of the vineyard, in taking away the wall and hedge thereof, vers. 5. which is done by contention, which violates the order of the Church, which is the wall thereof. Contention also may well be reckoned among the wild grapes, which the Lord there complains of, it being comprehended under that oppression, clamour or crying, noted vers. 7. 3. It is special comfort unto me to remember, that even as our blessed Lord jesus, for expounding this very text from Isaiah the fifth touching the parable of the vineyard, was persecuted by the jews, and then especially even at that hour they sought to lay hands upon him: Even so these my accusers, at the very same time of my expounding this parable, and for choosing this Text, have now hereupon done unto me this great wrong, by framing this accusatory writing against me, such as I never met withal before, nor ever (to my remembrance) heard of the like in my time by any that made profession of zeal in Religion. Whereas they do here again renew their complaint, and in 3 articles together do accuse me of bitterness in teaching against the godly, in the former, in this, and in the Section following, my answer is, 1. Ruth 1.20. Esa. 38.17. jer. 9.15. Lam. 3.15. It is the will of God and his counsel to do special good unto men, even unto godly men, by things that are specially bitter: In the works of his providence, by sundry afflictions he giveth them much bitterness; in stead of peace they have bitter bitterness; he feeds them with wormwood, and giveth them waters of gall to drink; he fills them with bitterness, and makes them drunken with wormwood. Deut. 2●. Leu. 26. In his word also, and in all the threats of the Law, the bitterness of sin, and the bitterness of God's wrath against sinners, is largely propounded unto us: and how can that holy Law be preached for the humbling of sinners, except these bitter things be declared unto them? Who knows not that the principal preservatives of bodily health are the bitterest receipts, and that in time of pestilence for avoiding of infection, men do willingly use wormwood, and Rue, Angelica, and like bitter herbs and roots? And if for health of body men refuse not bitter compositions, such as Hiera picra, or Holy bitter, how much more for the eternal salvation of the soul aught men to receive those rebukes, and reproofs of sin, which for the present are bitter to the flesh, Prov. 1. 25-30. & 5.12. & 12.1. etc. Exod. 12.8 Num. 9.11 but procure pleasures for evermore? The Lord tells us, the cause why men perish, is, because they will not endure reproof. The reason why men contemn the Gospel, is because they have not learned to know and feel the bitterness of sin. As God ordained that the Paschall Lamb should be eaten with bitter herbs; so to procure appetite & spiritual hunger after Christ, and his righteousness, and to enjoy the fruit both of the Law and Gospel, these reproofs of sin, esteemed so bitter, are yet most necessary. 2. There is a great error in some to accounted that bitter, which others accounted sweet: for as unto a corrupt stomach, even the most wholesome and pleasant meats, are unsavoury and bitter; even so unto some corrupt minds, even the consolations of God seem strange and unsavoury. Therefore aught every one to beware of error, Esa. 5.20. and corrupt judgement in discerning of these things: for woe be unto them that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter. 3. Of all other those in special are most guilty of this sin, that are wise in their own eyes, and think themselves full and rich in knowledge: Prov. 27.7 for he that is full despiseth an honey comb, and feels a bitterness and loathsomeness even in the sweetest things; whereas on the contrary unto the hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet. Seeing divers of these complainants hold themselves so full, that they have set up themselves for Prophets and Preachers, without any due trial or allowance of their gifts by the Church, what marvel if through this fullness they count sweet and wholesome things to be sleight, unsavoury and bitter? Numb. 11.5.6. with Exod. 16.31. & Psal. 78.24.25. Israël being full loathed Manna, though it was a sweet and pleasant food, of easy digestion, and the taste of it like unto the taste of wafers made with honey; they complained that their soul was dried away with that light meat; and they preferred the leeks, onions & garlic of Egypt, before the wheat of heaven, before Angel's food. It is to be observed, that though in sundry other articles of their complaint, they have alleged (though misalleged) particular instances: yet in this complaint of bitterness, they have not brought any particular instances: though they pretend there be many, yet have they not specified one passage, either in regard of matter, or harsh phrase to manifest the bitterness of my doctrine. Unto such general complaints, I can give no other than general answers. 5. Against this unjust complaint of theirs, I may justly oppose the testimony of a great number of our Congregation, who can and do testify, that such bitterness hath not been used by me in my doctrine, but that I have rather been too remiss in reproof of such great disorders as have of late crept in among us. It is observed according to the variety of gifts, that some Ministers do exceed others in the sharp rebuke of sin, and some in the ministering of consolation: and I do not know that I have been reputed among the first sort. And for myself, I can with good conscience testify, that I am not privy to myself of wronging them with any bitter or hard speeches in any particular passages in my Sermons. Have I offended in any part of my ministry, I judge it to be in the too much lenity that hath been used by me. 6. It lest of all becometh these men to complain of bitterness, whiles they themselves are so notoriously guilty of bitter contention and strife. As David said once of his enemies, Psal. 64.3. so may I of this their writing, they have bend it as their bow, and shoot out their arrows even bitter words. This writing shows a root of bitterness in them, which hath sprung up and spread itself into so many articles of complaint and reproach, to the defiling of many: And though it be true of all men by nature, that they are a generation of serpents; Ps. 140.3. & 10.7. with Rom. 3. 9-13.14. Eph. 4.31. and that which is said by the Psalmist of some men, that they have the gall of asps or adders poison under their lips, is by the Apostle applied unto all men, as being naturally guilty of such bitterness; yet when the same hath in special manner broken forth in some, there is then special reason to admonish them, to put away bitterness, clamour and reproach. Whereas they say, I make them vile before the whole Congregation, and to be insulted over by unworthy terms from those of my side, etc. I answer, 1. My labour and study is that sin may be made vile in the eyes of God's people, and 〈◊〉 godliness magnifyed. If their own inordinate courses do not make them vile, and to be disliked of the whole Congregation, then can my doctrine be no offence unto them, but is far from making them vile. The word of the Lord spoken by me is good unto them to walk uprightly, and I am ready to manifest the same in the particulars thereof. 2. For such as shall insult over them by unworthy terms, I do not approve any such insultations and vain boastings, but judge them worthy to be reproved. I exhort and desire with the Apostle, that all men would learn not to think of men above that which is written, 1. Cor. 4.6. and that no man be puffed up or swell against another for any man's cause. 3. As for insultations, let the intelligent Reader judge, and let those that know the state of this place judge, whether ever the like occasion of insulting against our Church was given to all sorts of adversaries, as is now given by these complainants. Did ever the Brownists, or had they ever such colour of insultation as now they have, when they see these members of our Church so complaining of our government and discipline, and of the undue power of the Classis? The title of these their complaints, printed and prefixed by the Brownists, and the conclusion affixed by a Brownist, what are they else but notable insultations over the pretended miserable slavery & bondage of our Church? What can their talk be otherwise? Have not all other adversaries of discipline, yea and of our faith and religion, occasion of insulting against us by unworthy terms, when they see the writings of Mr. Davenport, and of these complainants? 4. Whereas they speak again of those of my side, it is a testimony of their siding against me, and making a faction in the Church. Besides the warrant of Scripture before noted, and acknowledged by S●●ph. Of●. I have also the practice and example of the Reformed Churches of Scotland, France, Geneva, and the Netherlands, all on my side against them. Yea what one Church of note in all Europe that is on their sides in these complaints? Why are they not then ashamed through my side to wound all these? In the end of this exception, they do yet further blame my doctrine, and say that I strained the fift verse, which tells what God will do to his vineyard, and spoke altogether of men's disorders in the Ch●●●, etc. Hereunto I answer, ●. It is a very ignorant evil, and a carping at that which is very lawful, and oftentimes meet and necessary to be done, in such manner as I did in expounding that verse. For when God tells what he will do to sinners, seeing in the execution of that judgement he often useth the disorder, error and malice of men, to correct them by their own folly, and to make their very sins themselves to be their punishments; therefore in the explication of such judgements, which God threatens to do, it is meet to show the disorders and sins of men, by which he fulfilles his threatenings. So when God tells what he would do to his people, in cutting asunder his staff that was called bands, Zach. 11.14. and dissolving the brotherhood between judah and Israëll, what could be more fit for explication thereof, then to show the disorders, schisms and contentions of those people, and how he used the perverseness of their wills for the performance of his own will? Esa. 9.19.20.21. When God tells what he will do in his wrath against the wicked, he shows withal how he useth their own wrath mutually to consume one another. 2. Thess. 2.11. When the Apostle shows what God will do, in sending strong delusions unto men to believe lies, etc. How can that text more fitly be explained, then by declaring the Antichristian disorders, errors and confusions of men? Esa. 5.5. And even so when God tells what he would do, in taking away the hedge and wall of his vineyard, there was just cause for me to tell how that plague is executed, when men by their own disorders break down the wall of government many ways to the desolation of the Church, and therefore to give warning of those disorders to avoid them. 2. It is untrue which they say, that I spoke altogether of m●ns disorders in the Church: for both in the second branch of the doctrine, and in the use thereof, I spoke also of the work of God, that inflicted that judgement of taking away the wall of government, and of his hand, that was to be observed and looked unto in such judgements: and for the declaration of this, I then alleged these testimonies of Scripture, Esa. 3.1.2.3.4. Esa. 10.5.6. Esa. 19.14. Ezech. 14.4.10. Esa. 7.18. as may appear more fully by the notes of my Sermon, which I then preached: And therefore this cavil against my doctrine is doubly unjust. complainants. SECT. XXXIX. THirdly, he hath preached very bitterly and provokingly against private meetings, not only long since, but of late hath done very unjustly and manifest injury to Mr. Davenport, whom he (plainly enough) reproached in his Pulpit, about the meeting of diverse to hear him open the grounds of Religion, in a Catechising the family where he lived, every Lordsday after the Sermons were ended at 5 a clock at night, where many received much edification, which he hath injuriously now deprived us off, to the great grief of many godly souls. ANSWER. 1. THe private meetings, or rather the public meetings in private houses, which I preached against, were such where private men do preach ordinarily at set times and places; where diverse members of sundry families do meet together to hear, and this without allowance of the Church. This is such a disorder, as even the Brownists themselves do dislike and would not tolerate among them. If I have offended hereabout, it is that I have not preached oftener against the same, there being such occasion given thereunto. If this doctrine be bitter unto them, it ariseth from the root of bitterness in themselves, that cannot endure a just reproof of such a disordered practice. Would these accusers make good their accusation, why have they not brought some warrant from the Scripture to justify their own way, or to refute my doctrine? How shameless a thing is it, to accuse me of obstinacy, and not to convince me by the word of God? to testify before all men, that howsoever I bear the name, and fill up the place of a Pastor, yet I do not the duty of a Pastor, neither in government nor in doctrine, and yet not to manifest my doctrine to be repugnant to the Scriptures? As for other private conferences and godly exhortations and consolations, and mutual duties of Christians, I have ever exhorted and encouraged thereunto. 2. Whereas they complain of manifest injury done of late to Mr. Davenport, etc. This is that which was done by me. Having occasion to expound the institution of the Sacrament of Baptism, from those words of our Saviour to the Apostles, Mat. 28. ●9. Go ye and teach all nations, etc. I shown from thence what calling the Apostles had; and likewise what calling they aught to have, which take upon 〈…〉 public ●●●●●●ery of the word and Sacraments; that they aught not to preach before Christ sand them, and bid them Go, according to the order he hath appointed in his Church; and this I confirmed by sundry evidences of Scripture. If the practice of Mr. Davenport was lawful and unblameable, what reason is there either for him, or any of his friends, to be offended at this most necessary doctrine thus generally delivered, and in good manner from so pregnant a text? But if the practice of Mr. Davenport was inordinate and unlawful; there was no reason that I should refuse to speak of such wholesome doctrine, either for fear or favour, either of Mr. Davenport, or these complainants his friends. And what is this their complaint but to miscall the manifest truth of God, and to make it a manifest injury? If the publishing of this word shall thus be accounted a reproaching; then may I say with the Prophet, jer. 20.8. The word of the Lord was made a reproach unto me. 3. When they say, I reproached him in my Pulpit, though there seems to be some kind of scorn in this their speech, yet it serves to show that what I taught it was in the place whereunto I was lawfully called. And even this shows, that it was the greater insolency in that person, who when as I had in this place in the forenoon taught against the preaching of private men, that he in the afternoon of the same day, in the same place, should oppugn this doctrine they speak of, to the offence of many. 4. To excuse the preaching of Mr. Davenport, without a calling, they give it the name of catechising a family, as if it had been but a family exercise. What is this but a mockery to deceive and blear the eyes of such as might read their writing, when as the members of 30 or 40 families or more have been reckoned to assemble together in that place? If such a course were lawful, any sectary under pretence of a family exercise, might set open his doors and gather a multitude of people unto them. And further to open the grounds of Religion (as they speak) in such a catechising as he used, may as well be counted preaching as any other. And catechetical Sermons made without a calling or due allowance, may prove as dangerous as any other; whether preached at 3 or at 5 a clock; whether before or after other Sermons ended. 5. It is false they say, that I have injuriously deprived them of those meetings: for not I, but the Classis hath deprived them thereof. Neither did 〈…〉 Classis, as I lawfully might have 〈…〉 I use my liberty of having a voice therein, a● I might: but the same of this their meeting, and of the concourse of people 〈◊〉 hair Mr. Davenport, being noised and spread abroad through the City, and so coming also to the ears of the Classis, they deputed two Ministers from among them, to inquire the truth concerning this their meeting, which being done, and they finding the thing to be offensive, after deliberation they appointed two Ministers to go unto Mr. Davenport and Mr. Wh. in whose house this meeting was, and to admonish them in the name of the Classis, to show them the danger of this meeting and exercise, to the end that they might desist from the same. Mr. Davenport being absent, the message was delivered unto Mr. Wh. This being so, how partial and unjust are these accusers thus to complain of me, and of me alone? Are they deprived of their edification? Why do they not direct their complaint against the Ministers of the Classis? The truth is, how ever they colour their complaints, they do indeed defame the Classis through my name, and condemn the lawful order of these Reformed Churches, to justify their own disordered courses. 6. Whereas they say further, that this is done to the grief of many godly souls; though I will not rashly enter into the judgement of many such as came unto that meeting, nor pronounce sentence touching their godliness, yet this is well known, that some of them were such as had dealt very offensively and ungodlily in schisming from the Dutch Church, and leaving their communion, where they might freely and plenteously have enjoyed the means of edification, to the joy and comfort of their souls, and even at the same time of their meeting, there being a sermon hard by in the Wester-Kerck, at the same hour when Mr. Davenport preached in Mr. Wh. his house. 7. If that exercise of Mr. Davenport was no more than a lawful family exercise, 〈◊〉 by the word of God; why then did they leave it of at the 〈…〉? Deut. 6. Gen. 1●. God requires every Master of a family, to instruct his household in the knowledge and fear of God, and that commandment of God is to be observed, though any company of 〈◊〉 or Class●s whatsoever should forbidden the same. But it 〈…〉 consciences told them, it was not right which they did, in that they were content to dissolve that great meeting▪ and to altar their course. Otherwise they themselves should be guilty of that which they unjustly impute unto me: for if it was agreeable to the will of God, than they which for the will of man did abandon and forsake the will of God, are guilty of depriving so many of their edification, and of procuring so great grief to so many godly souls. 8. It is to be observed from this complaint as also from sundry other before, that these complainants did not without some reason in their preamble, testify these things (as themselves speak) principally to the Elders of this Church, and as it were dedicated this their slanderous writing unto them: for seeing the most of our Elders have given their approbation, and allowance of this disordered meeting, and by their example encouraged others to frequent the same; they might well think that without doubt they would be earnest patroness of this their own practice, and not lightly be drawn to condemn the same. But yet notwithstanding this, their reason is no sound reason; for had they wisely considered withal that these Elders had by this their practice made themselves parties in the business, and so fit to be judged themselves, then to be judges of others: had they also considered, that the Classis being a superior judicatory, had declared their judgement touching this exercise, they might well have marked how unreasonable it would be to make these Elders the Arbiters of this complaint. complainants. SECT. XL. FOurthly, about the question between him and Mr. Davenport, for the baptising of all children that were brought, though the parents were altogether unknown, he very reproachfully upbraided Mr. Davenport of error, and gave out that he would answer him in the Pulpit: And when the day came, wherein we expected the performance of his promise, he avoids the question between them, and fell upon the Anabaptists and Brownists, from both which Mr. Davenport differed in that point, as he had told him formerly, and offered him to declare in public, how far he differed therein; Is this brotherly dealing thus to use a Minister, who hath so lovingly assisted him and us in our necessity, and to traduce him falsely and injuriously in this manner, and all to the end to justify, his keeping of him out of the Church, wh●● the Church hath so much desired and bewaileth that they are deprived of him, which the Classis at first consented unto, though they kn●w the difference, till Mr. Paget brought it again to them by force, to have them make an order to condemn their own practice, and therefore 〈◊〉 ●●●tive Mr. Paget the only cause we are deprived of such heavenly means for our edification. ANSWER. FIrst concerning the question which hath been between Mr. Davenport and the Classis, about the baptising of such children, whose parents though no members of the Church, yet made themselves known to be Christians by their public profession of the same faith with us, by answering to the questions propounded in the administration of Baptism; although upon occasion I have and still do say, that it is the error of Mr. Davenport to deny baptism unto such; yet is this no reproachful upbraiding of him, unless these complainants could convince me of error for so speaking. When Mr. Davenport signified unto me, that he was not of Mr. Hookers opinion in sundry points; that he was of the same opinion with me, this was in effect as much as if he had said in express words, that Mr. Hooker was in error: was this a reproachful upbraiding of him, while he spoke but the truth? And as little reproach was there in my speech touching Mr. Davenport. But had I spoken in the rude language of these complainants, who (as I noted before) say of that writing which was framed for accommodation of Mr. Davenport, and subscribed first by 5. Ministers, and after confirmed by the Classis, that they think no godly man will absolutely be bound unto it, this had been indeed a reproachful and unchristian censure, seeing many godly men have their errors, whereunto they suffer themselves to be bound by an absolute subscription, and promise' to observe and maintain the same by a further degree of approbation, than was required of Mr. Davenport. Secondly, as for my promise, whereof they make a confused and unjust relation, thus it was. Having spoken in my Sermon of diverse errors, and beside others making special mention of Arrians, that degrade the Son of God from his dignity; of Anabaptists that degrade all infants from their dignity; of Brownists who degrade such infants from their dignity, whose parents are no members of a particular Church with us, though otherwise of the same Religion and profession with us: hereupon for conclusion, I uttered these words verbatim, as of purpose I writ them down before to prevent the perverting of them; viz. of this error of the Brownists I purpose (if the Lord permit) to speak more hereafter, and ere long, when I come to that part of the Catechism that concerns the Baptism of infants. This was all the promise that I made in public, of which there was so much expectation before hand, and so much talk after. Now had I spoken only of the Brownists error about Baptism; yet had I fulfilled my word, that I spoke in public. But furthermore whereas upon occasion I had elsewhere in private spoken to this purpose, that I would also deal against the opinion of Mr. Davenport, in my Sermon at that time which I had nominated; this promise was also performed by me. For the opinion of Mr. Davenport is or was (according to his own words and writings) that Baptism is to be denied to such infants, whose parents being no members of a particular Church, did refuse to submit unto private examination, although they made public profession of faith in answering to those questions, demanded of them at the baptism of their children. Now against this opinion I dealt in every argument, that I brought against the opinion of the Anabaptists and Brownists, and made express mention thereof, at lest 4 or 5 times; and besides this, those answers which I then gave to the several objections and allegations of the Brownists, touching the baptism of these infants, were such as did also serve to clear the question betwixt Mr. Davenport and us, as may further appear by the notes of my Sermon, which I then wrote more largely then at other times I was wont, fearing such wrong as these complainants do unto me; and the testimony of others can likewise serve for confirmation hereof. And therefore most false and injurious is the assertion of these men, that complain I avoided the question between us. Thirdly, whereas they tell of Mr. Davenports offer unto me, to declare in public, how far he differed from the Brownists, it is true indeed, that upon my motion he made such an offer, but therein he neither satisfied my desire, nor performed his own promise, though he had time enough to have done it long before he left his public preaching with us. And had he done this, and withal shown his reasons why he did so far differ, as he saith from the Brownists in this point; had he reproved and refuted their opinions, and answered their objections, it would soon have appeared, that 〈◊〉 had no such warrant to stand so much upon his own opinion. For there is such a near affinity betwixt their opinions, that the error of the Brownists could not be refuted by him, but that his own opinion must fall together. Their opinions are like twins that must live and die together. Fourthly, for their exclamation, Is this brotherly dealing thus to use a Minister, who hath so lovingly assisted him and 〈◊〉 in our necessity, etc. It is not strange to hear these complainants thus to writ, and thus to exclaim, when they have Mr. Davenport going before them in his writing, where he in like manner complains, saying, * Book of complaints pag. 12. though I have deserved better usage at Mr. Pagets' hands for almost 6 months assistance of him, and have done and suffered so much to preserve his peace and the Churches, etc. My answer unto them both is, first unto Mr. Davenport. 1. Against his almost 6 months assistance, he may set that other 6 months time mentioned by himself in his Protestation, wherein by his own confession he had secretly given out a writing against me, that could not but incense the minds of our people against me. Let him consider what good usage this was thus to traduce me in the dark, 6 months together before the publisher thereof did bring it to the press, and so to the light. 2. For his almost 6 months assistance, let it be considered, that more than 6 year's resistance is by Mr. Davenport procured unto us, by the grounds of contention, which he hath left behind him in opposition, to the order and practise of these Reformed Churches in diverse points before mentioned. 3. For his almost 6 months assistance, if it had been better, yet had Mr. Davenport no cause to upbrayde me with it, and to boast of it before others, seeing for his labour in that time he received a larger recompense, by the collection that was made for him, than some other godly Ministers have elsewhere received for twice 6 months assistance and labour in the ministry. Beside this, I answer unto these complainants, and wish them to consider further. 1. Before the coming of Mr. Davenport, had be dealt prudently, and meant to be a faithful and loving assistant unto me, he would first have known whether he could have accorded with us, before 〈◊〉 presented himself here as a champion for my oppos●et. ●. When he was come, had he lo●ingly assisted me, be would have laboured to take occasion, to have showed his consent with me in opposing such opinions and practices, as tend unto schism, whereby both our Church is most endangered, and I most troubled. This he did not, though the present necessity of our Church did urgently 〈◊〉 for it at his hand. 3. After his desistance from preaching, had he dealt faithfully & sincerely, as becometh a Minister of Christ, it is not probable that this slanderous writing had ever been made by these complainants his especial friends, to the great disturbance of our Church, and scandal of so many. Neither helps it to say, he rebuked some of them privately, or that in Mr. Wh. his house, he preached against some that begun to schism: for their dealing began to be so gross and shameful, that though there was no love of me yet if he loved himself and his own credit, for the purging of himself, he must needs declare that he would not justify the dealing of some of these complainants. Who knows not that they which are of one confederacy, may sometimes sharply rebuke some of their confederates for their rash and unadvised proceed in some particulars, and yet whet them & strengthen them in their opposition and contention otherwise, for maintenance of their common opinions. Fiftly, it is not enough for these complainants to burden me with a false relation of things done, unless they lay upon me also a burden of false imaginations, touching my thoughts and intents, which they surmise against me, as though I had not only done wrong, but all to the end to justify my keeping of him out of the Church; as if I had no other thought of preserving the Church, and avoiding of scandal and faction, and doing right to the infants; but all for mine own ends, as they spoke before, all for carnal respects, without regard of truth or right, without conscience of the commandment and will of God. While thus they seek to aggravate my fault, they do but aggravate their own presumptuous slander in their rash judging of my heart, with the ends and intents thereof. Sixthly, to that 〈◊〉 say of the Church so much desiring him, and bewailing that they are deprived of him; I answer, the Church desired him more at first before they knew his opposition to the Classis, 〈…〉 they do. Yea and many do 〈…〉 by his occasion are sprung up in the Church, wishing that he had never 〈◊〉 among us. Seventhly, it is also false and maketh the heap of their false assertions to be the greater, when as they say of having Mr. Davenport; which the Classis at first consented unto, though they knew the difference. For when the Classis consented, they knew no other, but that the difference was taken away, and that he consented to the judgement and counsel given him by writing, and that which we had done for his accommodation. When his consent was testified and known, thereupon our Eldership resolved for him; thereupon some Ministers consented to seek approbation of the Magistrates; thereupon the Magistrates consented, and thereupon the Classis consented, not knowing that the difference remained. And for the proof hereof, there is testimony of Magistrates and Ministers, of Classis and Eldership to confirm the same. Eightly, they complain that I brought the matter again to the Classis by force. I answer, 1. How do these complainants know in what manner I brought this matter to the Classis? which of the Elders hath told them, or what other witnesses have they of this force that was used. 2. The matter being formerly brought unto the Classis, that had given consent for his calling: the ease so depending they aught in all reason to know the issue thereof. 3. That might rather have been called an act of force and intrusion, if our Eldership without consent of the Classis, should have set up Mr. Davenport for a lecturer or assistant. 4. Mr. Davenport having contrary to expectation refused the calling, which was given unto him by consent of the Classis, it was my duty to acquaint them therewith. If these men would convince me of an offence herein, they must first prove that the discipline & government of these Churches is unlawful, and that their authority in these affairs is not to be regarded or looked after. Ninthly, where they say, that I brought the matter unto the Classis, to have them make an order to condemn their own practice; I had not well understood the meaning, but that Mr. Davenport, from whose writing (as it seemeth) they have taken these words, doth speak more plainly thereof, as being a thing unlike or not to be 〈…〉; if it were unlike or unreasonable that they should make an order to condemn their own practice, then is it not likely or reasonable that they would allow us to make an order for condemning of their practice: Than also was it not reasonable, that we in favour of Mr. Davenport should make an order to condemn our own practice, and to justify the practice of the Brownists. Lastly, to make the measure of their slanderous conceits yet the greater, they conceive that Mr. Paget is the only cause they are deprived of such heavenly means for their edification. To this I answer, 1. The special cause that hath deprived them of Mr. Davenport, is Mr. Davenports own denial to administer the Sacrament of Baptism, according to the order of these Churches; and if any of these complainants, being of the same judgement, have confirmed Mr. Davenport in this opinion, then are they also causes of this deprivation. And if Mr. Davenport be of the same mind with these complainants in this their writing, touching the undue power of the Classis, then is there much more cause in himself, why they should be deprived of him, lest he should harden them in the conceit of that new form of government, that appears to be in their heads. 2. Seeing the Classis required of Mr. Davenport, a consent unto that advice given by writing unto him, which he refused; seeing the Magistrates also required our Elders to surcease from seeking him, either as Pastor or assistant: Seeing Mr. Davenport himself in his complaint against the Classis, doth lay blame upon them also, and saith, What remained now to be done, Book of complaints pag. 9 but either voluntary desistance on my part, or violent rejection on theirs? with what forehead can it be said, that I am the only cause of depriving them of him? Or will they have all both Magistrates and Ministers to pervert justice only for my sake without respect of right? How far doth this their contumelious slander extend itself? 3. As for the heavenly means of edification (whereof they speak) they are the doctrine of salvation, the publishing of the Covenant, and the seals thereof: and seeing these have been and may be found in such as Mr. Ainsworth, Mr. johnson, Mr. Robinson, Mr. jacob and the like as well as in Mr. Davenport, who yet in regard of other errors, concerning discipline and government of the Church, were unfit and unworthy to be called or admitted for Pastors in a well established 〈◊〉; why 〈…〉 Mr. Davenport also in some 〈◊〉, though not so deep in 〈◊〉 as they especially in such places, where there 〈…〉 danger ready to arise thereby. The like may be observed also for the preaching and prophesying of ja. Cr. Tho. Flat. and such like. Their preaching & their doctrine was either heavenly means for edification, or else they were earthly and carnal: M●●. 21.25. for our Saviour makes but two kinds, either from heaven or of men. If they say unto us, that their exercises were divine and heavenly means for edification, we may then well say unto them, that it is no hurt unto the Church of God to be deprived of some heavenly means * 1. Cor. 14 33.40. used in disorder. The PROTESTATION of the complainants. SECT. XLI. NOw we pray you our Elders, in the fear of God, to take these our complaints to heart, and to give your judgement, whether it b●●●● fit and more than time, that some lawful course be taken for the redress of these grievances, and to consult which way it may best be done. That so in that great day of the Lord, you may give up your account, for the discharge of this trust committed unto you with joy, which if yet you shall upon this our solemn complaint neglect to do, 〈◊〉 do protest before the Lord and his Church, to be wholly guiltless of all these evils having done our utmost endeavour for the redress of the same, and the sin thereof to lay upon Mr. john Paget our present. 〈◊〉, at the principal cause of all these evils, and next upon yourselves, who have the chiefest authority in the Church for the redress 〈◊〉 evils. ANSWER. IN the matter of this PROTESTATION observe two special parts; whereof the first is a justification of themselves; the second a condemnation of me. The justification of themselves is marvellous full and peremptory, amplified with swelling words of great and vain boasting, whiles they do protest that they are guiltless or innocent; that they are guiltless of all those evils; that they are wholly guiltless; that they have done their utmost endeavour for the redress of the same. But 〈…〉 their protestation, in regard of 〈…〉 justification of themselves, may appear diverse ways: 1. They are defiled with the guilt of those manifold slanders, which I have noted in their complaints before, whereunto they have reference in this protestation, in saying all those evils, wherein they can never, while the world stands, justify themselves by due proof thereof. Protestations made upon false grounds, are double pollutions. And therefore though by this protestation they seek to clothe themselves with a white stool and robe of righteousness, as being wholly guiltless, and spotless in all these matters of complaint; yet let them not think that for such a protestation as this, their subscribed names shall be written among those names that have not defiled their garments, and therefore are said to walk with Christ in white. Rev. 3.4. Gal. 6.7. This vain Protestation is a mere delusion and mockery, whereby they deceive themselves; but God is not mocked. 2. They protest falsely, and are no good Protestants in this their Protestation, when as they boast of having done their utmost endeavour for redress of evils; seeing they have not with their utmost care boured to bring the Word of God and good warrant from the Scriptures, to manifest that to be evil, which they complain of. Only in their first complaint, they allege two testimonies of Scripture, which they do not well understand, as I have showed before: but for all the rest of their complaints following, touching the weighty controversies of the discipline and government of the Church, they bring no one testimony from the book of God. Psal. 19.9. 2. Tim. 3.16. Esa. 8.20. It is the word of God, which is the divine instrument for the redress of evils, for the correcting of error, and reforming of disorders; and while they have not laid these testimonies of the Lord before us, they have not used that godly endeavour requisite in such cases. 3. They have not done their utmost endeavour for the redress of evils; because they have not brought their complaints unto the Classis, under which they stand, to hear both their counsel and their sentence touching the same. They have not endeavoured to make a clear Remonstrance from the Scriptures, and to show it unto the Classis, and upon want of redress there unto the Synod also. 4. They have not done their utmost endeavour for the redress of evils, so long as they have not with their utmost care and labour sought the help 〈…〉 the redress of evils, and for the suppo●● of those that are oppressed. That this aught to be done, is professed by themselves: Tho. Fa. Tho. Flet. Tho. Ad. Ios. Ph. and others have testified in the Consistory, Anno 1631 Nou. 10. that rather than they would lose the liberty of the Church, they would appeal unto the Christian Magistrate. Now in this complaint it is said, that I have deprived the Church of that liberty and power, that Christ hath given it in the free choice of their Pastor; that I have deprived the Elders of their power in government, etc. If the liberty of the Church be thus lost, then by their own confession, the authority of the Magistrates is to be sought. Therefore they that have made this Protestation of their innocency, and of being wholly guiltless, even for their utmost endeavour for redress, is not just and upright. 5. They are not wholly guiltless, neither have they used their utmost endeavour for redress of evils, if they have not at lest used the private counsel of godly and learned men in these Countries near unto them, for their better information and direction in such a bold enterprise as this. And of all the Dutch, French, English, or Scottish Ministers their neighbours here, who is it that hath given them any counsel or encouragement for this their writing & Protestation? If happily Mr. Davenports advice be alleged, they aught to consider that be being but one, and such a one as is many ways a party joining in the same complaints, his judgement aught to have been suspected, and not suddenly or easily rested in; seeing the holy Ghost tells us, that in the multitude of Counselors is health, as I have formerly noted. If his hand be with them in this business, it may sooner defile himself, then make them guiltless. But if they have not so much as his counsel and approbation, then where is their utmost endeavour, and where is that godly care that aught to have been used for avoiding of offence? 6. Their complaints of the Church's slavery and bondage, and of the undue power of the Classis, and this their Protestation thereupon, are repugnant to the former profession of the Elders & Deacons, with 30 or 40 members of the Church, among whom were the chief of these complainants, who in the question about Mr. Hooker, did acknowledge the authority of the Classis, by promising (as appeareth in the record * Sect. 3. before mentioned) that if 〈…〉 ●●●selfe ●o acknowledge 〈…〉 the Classis, they would not present him at all, etc. 7. 〈…〉 Protesters themselves, though they here justify themselves, yet can they not justify one another. Those 9 first subscribers that separated themselves from the communion, and refused formerly to partake in the Lord's Supper with us, and thought it their duty so to do, for the keeping of themselves guiltless▪ how can they protest before the Lord, that the other 12 which followed not their example, are wholly guiltless, as having done their utmost endeavour for the redress of evils? Those 12 again that thought it enough to complain, and durst not refuse communion; how can they protest, that such separatours are innocent, whom they condemned by their example? These complainants that have been of so different carriage, must needs impute some guiltiness one to another, and cannot believe this Protestation of their fellows to be true and just. The second part of their Protestation, is a condemnation of me: They protest before God, that the sin lies upon Mr. john Pages, as the principal cause of all those evilly; and next upon the Elders conditionally, if they do not t●●ke their complaint to heart, etc. As for Mr. john Davenport, and themselves, that the sin should lie upon him or them; that either he or they should be principal causes of these evils, herein it seems they be as blind as ●olles. Having first a●ayed themselves in white and shining apparel of ●●gine● innocency; they seek in the next place to cloth me with the black to be of confusion. This their dealing with me calls to my remembrance the cruel usage, Io. Fox, Act. & M●n. p. 573 Edit. 1610. which the Romanists in the Council of Constance did heretofore show unto john Huss the Bohemian, that faithful Martyr of Christ. Having condemned him to be burned at a stake; they caused a crown of paper to be made, and set upon his head, whereon were painted three Devilles of wonderful ugly shape, with this title over their heads, The Arch-Heretick: for this also do these complainants. Having kindled a fire of contention to burn me, in so many false accusations; they make this Protestation like a paper-crown for my head, with black figures upon it, and this title above, The Arch-sinner, or as they entitle me in their own express words, The principal cause of all those evils. But as we heard before, how vain they have been in the justification of themselves; 〈…〉 For 1. It 〈…〉 sentence of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tion against me, before they have heard my answer to their complaints. Had they deser●ed the●●●●ld prote●●tion, until I had be●ne permitted to speak for myself, and to make mine Apology against their 〈…〉, then had there been more show 〈◊〉 in th●● which now in ●●●ing. They first protest & 〈◊〉 sentence against me, and then wait for answer. 2. As they wanted the warrant of holy Scripture for their own justification, so do they also for the condemnation of me. When they can prove by the Word of God, that this form of government in these Reformed Churches, which standeth in the authority of Classi● and Synods, as well as of Consistoryes, is unlawful; and when they can demonstrate from the Scriptures that new discipline, whereby every particular Congregation is prescribed to be independent, and not subject to any other Ecclesiastical power out of itself, etc. then may they ha●e some colour of condemning every Minister of these Reformed Churches, and me with them, but not before: and yet neither then also can they justify this Protestation, unless according to their former complaints, they could prove me both obstinate in such error, and an author of bringing the pretended slavery and bondage into our Church. 3. It is to be observed how these complainants, though they know diverse of the Elders to be of the same mind with themselves in sundry of the differences betwixt them and the Classis; yet they scorn to protest against them also, as causes of all these evils next unto me, conditionally if they do not take their complaint to heart, etc. Hereby they furnish those Elders with some colourable cause, if they attempt any thing, which these men call a lawful course, though by others otherwise judged of: for here is show of answer afforded unto these Elders, namely that they are complained of; that they are protested against; that they are accused as causes of all these evils, if they do not so and so as is expected from them. 4. If we consider the matter according to the judgement and opinion of th●se complainants, it will appear that they have overs●●● 〈◊〉 in accusing the Elders as causes of these pretended 〈…〉 call 〈…〉 desires 〈…〉 they have 〈…〉 for Mr. D●●●●port, etc. then aught they not to have complained of them no●●●nto me. But if they have conscience of the m●●ters complained off, they must rather complain of Magistrates and Ministers of the Class●s, and of a great number of the members of our Church, who are more opposite unto their opinions and desires, then are these Elders protested against. And therefore it is against all equity, that they should so injuriously, so partially and so ingrateful deal with their friends, in placing them next unto me, as the causes of evil; when according to their opinion, others more blame worthy should rather come betwixt. From the matter of their PROTESTATION, come we now to consider the form of it. They protest before the Lord and his Church. A protestation is more than a simple affirmation, and more than an earnest asseveration. In protestations witnesses are alleged and called for; and the word which in Scripture is sometimes translated to protest, the very same is sometimes also well translated to * Deu. 4.26 & 30.19. call for witnesses, according to the just and right signification thereof. The witnesses which these complainants call for, are of two sorts; The Lord from heaven, and his Church upon earth. For the first witness; To protest before the Lord, is more than common Protestations; to call him for a witness in our protests, doth participate of the nature of an oath, in one special part thereof. And hereby may appear the fearful sin of these presumptuous Protestants, who call the Lord for a witness of their double falsehood; of their justification of themselves as wholly guiltless; of their condemnation of me, as a principal and obstinate offender, as ●ath been showed before. The Lord is witness of every idle word, though he be not called for, but being called for a witness in such a bold Protestation, so void of truth, as if men would make the God of truth accessary unto their false assertions, this cannot but kindle the wrath of God, and his jealousye against those that do so take his Reverend & Glorious Name in vain, neither will he hold them guiltless, though they boastingly hold themselves wholly guiltless. Prov. 6.16. etc. The soul of the Lord doth abhor falsehood, and he will be a swift 〈…〉 For their second witness, which is the Church of God: I answer, 1. The Reformed Churches in these Low-countrieses, in Scotland, in France, 〈…〉, cannot be witnesses of their innocency, nor hold them wholly guiltless, seeing they use such a government by Classical and Synodal assemblies, as these complainants do count a burden, oppression and reproach as an undue power. 2. This particular Church, whereof these men are members, doth not (so fare as I can discern) justify their Protestation, but complains of these complainants for their scandalous writing, in reproach of the government and doctrine taught by me in the same. 3. Even these complainants being so different as is before noted, cannot be witnesses for the truth of this protestation. Yea I assure myself, that if they were severally examined, they neither understood what they have subscribed unto; neither yet would agreed one with another, touching the meaning of these complaints. And therefore though they have called Heaven and Earth to record against me, and for themselves yet can they not be cleared by either of them in such manner as they have protested. Their own witnesses are against themselves. Whereas in fine they tell the Elders, that they have the chiefest authority in the Church, etc. I answer, 1. The Elders that rule well, are worthy of double honour. Their principal dignity is to be examples of the flock in all godliness, and to use their power aright. But to exercise authority, according to the conceits of these men, noted in their complaints, in opposition unto the superior power, that is in Classes and Synods, the Elders might thereby justly make themselves unworthy of any authority, honour or office at all in the Church of God. 2. If the Elders have the chiefest authority in the Church, how comes it to pass that some of these complainants do usurp and arrogate an authority above them, in preaching and expounding the Scriptures, so as these Elders dare not attempt? complainants. SECT. XLII. SO beseeching the Lord to bless our endeavours, and desiring you to 'cause these our complaints to rest upon Record in the Register of this Church, that after times may see how these evils have been witnessed against, we subscribe our names as followeth, desiring also that place may be left in the Register for all others that hearing hereof, shall desire to have their names underwritten, for the more full witness of these things: because we have not gathered many names, as we could have done of many (because you might have nothing to take offence at that way) which we conceive would gladly have joined with us herein, not only of men, but of many godly women also that are of the same mind with us. W.B. N.I. I.C. I.Po. I.S. L.C. A.H. H.P. T.Fl. We who last time, did not with our brethren above written abstain from the Lords Supper, yet desire to join as one with them in these complaints and grievances, and therefore have underwritten our names as followeth, S.Of. T.Fa. T.Ad. D.B. E.P. G.B. H.D. E.S. F.D. P.L. I.H. R.P. It is here to be noted, that I.H. P.L. and F.D. having acknowledged their faults for this unwarrantable subscription, are to be exempted from the number of them. ANSWER. IN the conclusion of these complainants observe this heap of offences, partly in the writing, and partly in their deeds attending the same. 1. After so many reproachful complaints, to conclude and seal up all with such a vehement Protestion, was a great boldness in sin. 2. Not to co●ent themselves with words, but with pen and ink to writ down their reproaches, was another boldness in evil-doing. 3. After writing to gather hands and subscription of names, was a further strengthening of themselves in wrong-doing, & a snare unto others. 4. To boast they could have done more; and in such offence to pretend avoiding of offence as here they do, is so much the more offensive. 5. Besides their own writing, to require a public record in the Register of the Church, is a great insolency. 6. Besides public record, to require a space left for subscription of more names, is a strange impudence. 7. To be so eager in the pursuit hereof, as 5 several times to come unto the Consistory, in seeking to be registered there, as was done by some of them, is a strange importunity. 8. To be thus importunate and urgent at such time, when I was weak and sickly that I could not come abroad, sometimes to see what they did, was a great inhumanity. 9 To leave their subscribed complaints in the hands of such as without their knowledge might either give copies thereof in writing, as was first done, or might also print the same, as now by one of them it is printed, this was a great unadvisedness, and folly in them. 10. To take the name of God in vain, by beseeching the Lord to bless these their unlawful endeavours, (even as some of them also had a remarkable day of fasting, and Mr. Davenport with them, about the same time or a little before they delivered up this writing, as if they did fast to strife and debate, Esa. 58.4. to smite with the fist of wickedness, and to make their voice to be heard on high,) this is more offensive & a just cause of new humiliation unto them. Now if these complainants had their desire fulfilled, what else could be expected but faction and schism, and all manner of confusion in the Church? If their writing against me be recorded in the Register of the Church, it is reason that my answer be recorded also. If their writing have names subscribed, and place left for whosoever will, to join their names with them; it is equal that under my answer a place be left also for whosoever will to underwrite their names therein. If any new members of the Church be taken on, the like liberty may as well be claimed by them, to subscribe their names as they please, either in the one or other void place left for subscription, etc. But who sees not what an intolerable and pernicious fancy these men have hatched in their brains? This their practice represents unto us as in a glass, the lively image of a deadly war, wherein the ordering of the battle is already thus described, or rather prescribed by them: The 9 first Subscribers being more forward in separating then the rest, are not without reason set foremost by themselves, in the Vantgarde of this subscription. The other 12 that join in the complaint, but were not so hasty to leave communion in the Lord's Supper, are placed in the middle-ward, with some distinction after the former. Those that come after, whose names they would have to be written in the empty space, that is left for them in their desire, they must then bring up the rear of this Army, and so make the Rearward. Yea it is noted in the end of their printed book, that now already, After these grievances were given unto the Consistory, diverse members more hearing thereof, desired to join in the same, and subscribed their names also. These unknown adversaries, whose names though they be subscribed, are yet hidden from me, are like unto the troops of reserve, which for the present lurk in secret and lie in ambuscado, ready to break out, and to make an assault and to fall on, as opportunity shall serve. This army of complainants being thus set in array, and armed for the battle, what contention and strife; what scandal and offence do they occasion hereby? How ill doth it become these men with prayers and protestations, to require others to think upon some lawful course to be taken for the redress of evils; and yet at the same time to device and desire, and that so importunately, such an unlawful, disordered and dangerous course for the increase of evils, as that the like at any time hath scarcely been heard of? The lawful course for redress of evils, is that plain highway, and that approved order, wherein we are established with these Reformed Churches, namely if any be wronged or unsatisfyed in the Eldership, to go for refuge unto the Classis, and from thence, if need be, to the Synod; unless by the Word of God this way be proved unlawful. To conclude, for all the evident wrongs, which these complainants have done unto me, how many and how great so ever they be; though they have sought to blot my name with reproach; though their complaints be now recorded, and their names registered in many hundred of W. B. his books; yet my prayer unto God for them is, that their offence herein may be blotted out of that record & book of remembrance that lieth open before the Lord, and that by their unfeigned repentance, they obtain grace and favour from God. And as for me, my hope and confidence is in the Lord, who through his rich grace hath covered all mine iniquities in Christ; and notwithstanding these accusations, in the mids of my weakness, I can truly say with his reproached servants, according to the measure of the gift of God, job 31.35.36.37. Though mine adversary should writ a book against me, I will take it upon my shoulder, and bind it as a crown unto me. I will declare unto him the number of my steps, etc. The Lord is my light and my salvation, Psal. 27.1. whom shall I fear? The Lord is the strength of my life, of whom shall I be afraid? Though an host encamp against me; though war rise up against me, yet will I wait for the promise of the Lord made unto his servants, namely, that the righteousness of God in Christ being made mine, Esa. 58.8. shall go before me, and be as the vanguard for my salvation, and that the glory of the Lord shall be my rearward. To this God of glory be praise and honour by jesus Christ for evermore. AMEN. An Answer to the Allegations of Scripture brought by Mr. Davenport, against the baptising of such infants, whose parents appear to be Christians, in such manner as is declared in the writing of the 5 Ministers * Pag. 44.45. above mentioned. Mr. DAVENPORT. FIrst I neither did nor do deny to baptism their infants who are members of this Church, which seeing it is so, I desire to understand by what right the Pastor of any particular Church, can be bound to exercise his ministry in any act of it, towards those who are no members of his Church, seeing the Apostle Paul required no more of the Pastors of Ephesus, then to take heed to themselves, and to all the flock, whereof the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers. Act. 20.28. ANSWER. FIrst, by what right Mr. Davenport himself being no member of our Church, did communicate with us in the Lord's Supper, by the same right may the Pastor of any particular Church upon occasion exercise his ministry in some act thereof, towards those who are no members of his Church. Had Mr. Davenport looked well upon himself and his own practice, he might have found reason to bethink himself better, unless he think that I was not bound to exercise any act of my ministry towards him, when as he desired the same. Secondly, suppose Paul in the place alleged had required no more of the Pastors of Ephesus, then that which Mr. Davenport intendeth, yet might a further duty have been laid upon them in some other place of Scripture. It is no good kind of disputing, to argue thus, Not more is required of Ministers in such and such a place, therefore in no other place at all. Thirdly, and more particularly, whereas the solemn preaching of the Gospel with public invocation of the name of God, are ministerial acts; seeing Pastors and teachers, the maidens of wisdom, are not only bound to admit, but also to invite and call others even those that are without, Heathens, Turks or jews, understanding the language to come and hear them, thereby to pluck them out of the pit of destruction, Prov. 9.3.4.5. Mat. 28.19.20. Therefore are they bound to exercise some acts of their ministry towards those who are no members of their Church. Fourthly, for the Administration of the Sacraments, it is also a duty of the ministry, to be performed by a Pastor to more than the members of his particular congregation: and this not only by admission of the particular members of an other Church to receive the Lords Supper with them in their Church upon occasion, which the * See Arrow against separ. p. 96. 97. Brownists themselves do allow; but also when need requires to administer the Sacraments, both of Baptism and the Lords Supper in neighbour Churches that are destitute, being required thereunto. This I have * Ibid. p. 17. 18. and again from pag. 109. to 114. heretofore already proved against Mr. Ainsworth; and it is the error of those Separatists, to deprive themselves of such help. Hereupon it followed, that after the death of Mr. Ainsworth for many years together, they were without Sacraments, and had neither Lords Supper nor Baptism administered in their Church, their children for many years remaining unbaptised, and sundry dying unbaptised: for which neglect and delay of baptism, they had just cause to fear that the Lord might have met them, Exod. 4.24. as he did Moses in the Inn, for neglecting to circumcise his son. And it is observable how Mr. Davenport stumbleth at the same stone, and misalledgeth the very same place of Scripture, Act. 20.28. as Mr. Ainsworth had done before to the same purpose, to restrain Pastors from executing any duty or act of their ministry towards such as are no members of their own particular congregation. Fifthly, for the government of the Church, and for administration of discipline, which is an other work of the ministry; this also belongeth unto Pastors, not only for the members of the particular Church specially committed unto them, but for the members of many other particular congregations combined in Classes and Synods, where the causes and controversies of many people are decided and determined by the joint authority of many Ministers, meeting together for that end, as we see in that example, Act. 15.2. etc. Sixthly, to come nearer unto this place Act. 20.28. men do then attend unto their own flock, whereof the H. Ghost hath made them overseers, when they labour that their flock may be increased, that more souls may daily be added to the flock, and that the number of the faithful may grow; for thereby the mutual edification, comfort and spiritual joy of all is increased, according to that blessing that is often noted in the * Esa. 49.20.21. Act. 4.4. & 5.14. Scriptures. This blessing is obtained by the labours of faithful Ministers, with those which at first are no members of the Church, in seeking to bring them into the fold. And thus the Pastors of Ephesus living among the great multitude of infidels and heathenish Idolatours in that City, had not attended unto the flock committed unto them, unless they had laboured to increase their flock by their labours towards those Ephesians that were without. Seventhly, men do then attend unto their own flock, when they labour that the same may be preserved in the truth, and defended against the manifold and dangerous errors, such as the Pastors of Ephesus were warned of Act. 20.29.30. In such dangers if either the faithful Pastors were taken away by death; or if through weakness of gifts they were not able to stop the mouths of adversaries, what remained then to be done, 1. Cor. 12.25.26.27. but to seek the help of neighbour Ministers for their assistance, the Lord requiring that members of the body of Christ, should take care of one an other in their necessities to help them? Now this convincing of erroneous persons judicially in the Church, being a ministerial duty, Tit. 1.9.10.11. 1. Tim. 5.20. it follows that upon the performance hereof in such cases, men may exercise some acts of their ministry towards such as are no members of their own particular congregation. Eightly, whereas Mr. Davenport doth afterwards acknowledge, that in regard of the communion of particular Churches amongst themselves, he neither did nor doth refuse to baptism their infants, who are not members of this Church: so that he may be satisfied by some precedent examination, if otherwise they be unknown unto him, that they are Christians indeed: hereby he doth plainly refute himself, and that diverse ways; for, 1. If the communion of particular Churches amongst themselves do warrant him to baptism their infants, who are no members of his Church, then is it an error to think that a Pastor may not exercise his ministry in some act of it, toward those who are no members of his Church; and all his allegations to that and are vain and idle. 2. How vain is it to call into question, whether they be Christians indeed, viz. in regard of their external profession, who are confessed to be members of an other true Christian Church, that is in communion with us? 3. Seeing Mr. Davenport professeth, that he neither did nor doth deny to baptism their infants who are members of this Church, what reason hath he to require a precedent examination of the members of an other Church more than of the members of this Church? If the members of this Church may be baptised upon this warrant, because they are members of it, why may not the members of an other true Church be also baptised upon the same ground? 4. Why doth Mr. Davenport only mention his regard of the communion of particular Churches amongst themselves for baptising their infants? Why doth he not as well regard the communion of particular persons, members of th●●atholick or universal Church, seeing they also may have their i●●●●s baptised, though not joined unto a particular visible Church? 5. Whereas Mr. Davenport hath resigned his Pastoral or Ministerial charge in London, and is now no established Minister of any particular Congregation, having no calling elsewhere, and doth yet upon occasion preach sometimes for others, as for Mr. Balmf. & Mr. Pet. etc. it were worthy to be known, upon what ground he doth administer the word unto them. If he do it by virtue of that communion, which is betwixt particular Churches, when as he himself is no Minister of any particular Church, how much more may they that are established Ministers, perform some acts of their ministry to those that are no members of their Churches, when as upon occasion they are required so to do? If he do it not as a Minister, 1. Cor. 14.40. nor counts it any Ministerial act, but doth it as a Prophet, and as in an exercise of prophecy, yet seeing this also aught not to be done, but according to order, and not without consent of such as have authority to dispose and govern such actions; if now their calling, request or allowance can warrant him to do that which otherwise would be unlawful, why may not also the request of the same persons warrant him that is an established Minister to perform some Ministerial act in a neighbour Church, or to some members thereof, though otherwise unlawful, if he were not so required? Or if he have any other ground whereon he resteth, the knowledge and consideration thereof might happily give some further light unto this controversy. Mr. DAVENPORT. THe same is required of Archipp●●, to take heed to the ministry which he had received of the Lord, (viz. amongst the Colossians) that he fulfil it. Col. 4.17. ANSWER. THe answer made unto the former allegation, may serve for answer of this: Yet from hence also diverse things are to be observed. 1. If the ministry aught to be fulfilled, than not to be lightly forsaken without lawful and orderly dimission upon a just calling to serve the Church of Christ elsewhere, or unless by necessity men be deposed by such authority as is not to be resisted. They that otherwise forsake the flock, do not fulfil their ministry. Men may flee or hide themselves in time of danger, yet without resignation of their callings. 2. If the ministry aught to be fulfilled, then are the Ministers to declare the whole will and counsel of God, so far as it is revealed unto them, for the good of God's people, Act. 20.20.27. especially before they departed from their Churches, to show the equity of their cause, to manifest the danger of those errors, for which they leave their flocks, that their people also may witness the truth for which their Ministers suffer; otherwise they are guilty of double desertion of their flock. 3. If that be a right ministry which is received in the Lord, which is obtained by a lawful calling, then may no man without intrusion take upon him solemnly to preach & minister the Gospel of Christ at set times and places, where the members of many families do ordinarily meet together, without due warrant and allowance of the Church, where such things are practised. As Paul thought it needful to have these things said unto Archippus; so let every godly Minister consider, whether it be not meat that each of these things should be duly regarded of them. Mr. DAVENPORT. PEter also exhorteth the Elders, saying, feed the flock that is amongst you. 1. Pet. 5.2. ANSWER. THe strength of that objection which is employed in these words, hath been already taken away in answer unto the former allegation, Act. 20.28. and we may yet further observe touching this place. 1. The similitude taken from Shepherds feeding their flocks, doth not restrain Ministers from exercising some act of their ministry, towards those who are no members of their particular congregation: seeing even shepherds for the defence and benefit of their flocks, and for their mutual assistance, have reason to combine themselves together for the performance of some works of their calling towards the endangered sheep of other flocks, as appeareth Esa. 31.4. Luk. 2.8. Gen. 29.7.8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. The word here translated feeding, doth also signify to rule and govern, as Rev. 12.5. and 19.15. If this kind of feeding be restrained unto one congregation only, then is all the authority and government of Churches by Classes and Synods overthrown thereby: then is it unlawful for assemblies of Ministers, to exercise any act of power, or to give their voices for the decision of controversies in any congregation beside their own, contrary unto the use of this word of feeding, applied unto such in Israël, as exercised some acts of their ministry, for the help and benefit of diverse congregations, as Ezek. 34.2. etc. 3. If we consider the persons to whom Peter wrote this Epistle, namely, to the elect strangers dispersed throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bythinia, 1. Pet. 1.1.2. If withal we consider the manifold necessities whereunto these Christians were subject in their scattered habitations in those times of persecution, what an unreasonable thing is it to imagine that the Ministers of those Countries might not exercise some act of their ministry for baptising an infant of those dispersed strangers, which were no members of their own congregation? Arrow against separ. p. 97. 4. It is also to be observed, how this allegation 1. Pet. 5.2. hath been formerly brought against me by Mr. Ainsworth, and to like purpose as Mr. Davenport here useth it. And indeed, such application of it doth better serve the turn of the Brownists, that rend the Church of God by their schism, than those that desire to preserve the communion of Christian congregations by this bond of combination observed among them. Mr. DAVENPORT. Mr. Davenport speaking of himself, saith, The Pastor of the English Church can not satisfy his conscience, that it is lawful for him so to do; yea he greatly feareth, lest Christ will judge him guilty, if he suffer himself to be in bondage under such a custom, which is contrary to the canon of the Apostle, let every man be persuaded in his own mind, Rom. 14.5. and whatsoever is not of faith is sin, vers. 23. ANSWER. 1. THe Apostle here speaks of doubting about things indifferent, as the use of meats and observation of days, Rom. 14. 2-6. which observation doth not commend us to God; seeing neither they that did eat were the better, nor they that eat not, were the worse, 1. Cor. 8.8. The kingdom of God consisted not in such things, Rom. 14.17. But the matter in controversy betwixt us, is neither in itself, nor in the estimation of either part, a thing indifferent. You judge it a sin to baptism the infants of such parents; we judge it a sin to deny baptism unto them. Therefore though the Apostle do allow a toleration of things indifferent, this is no warrant for toleration of that which is held sinful and simply unlawful. 2. The Apostle here speaks of such a toleration, whereby men were received as brethren and members of Christ, such as might be saved, being received of God, Rom. 14.3. Our question is not of such receiving, but of receiving to an office and public ministry with us in the Church. Now many may be received for Christians, which can not lawfully be admitted for Ministers, in regard of their dissension and differences from the Church of God. 3. The doubting and wavering in matters of Religion, being a distraction and suspension of the mind betwixt truth and error, and being repugnant to faith, is a very dangerous and great evil to be taken heed of. It brings men oftentimes into a very miserable condition, and to a necessity of sinning to their great woe and hurt: for in many duties that are to be done, the doubting person is condemned & sinneth, whether he do them or do them not. For example, it being a duty to hear the word of God in true Churches; he that gins to decline unto schism and doubts, it is a sin, that person sins both ways; If he 〈◊〉 ●●●●tingly, it is a sin not being of faith, Tit. 1.15. Rom. 14.23. If he refuse to hear, it is a sin and schism, condemned Heb. 10.25. in forsaking the assembly of the Saint. So for one declining to Anabaptisme, doubting whether his child should be baptised or not: If he bring it to baptism doubtingly, it is a sin for want of faith. If he refuse to bring it, he sins many ways against his child, and against the Church of God. And so in many other cases. Therefore let men take heed, how they excuse themselves by their doubting, and how they please themselves therein. 4. For Mr. Davenport, seeing he heard of our controversies before his coming over the Seas unto us, and of this particular about baptism, if he doubted hereof, and could not satisfy his conscience, that it was lawful for him to join with us in the baptising of such infants as we speak of; then aught he rather not to have offered himself unto us, to disturb our Church's peace by the doubts which he brought with him, and by the contentions likely to arise thereupon. Than might our Church have been edified by the more speedy calling of some other faithful Minister, who being free from this doubting and irresolution of mind, could then have better accorded with us. Mr. DAVENPORT. I Take the name of Christians (in this question) in the same sense wherein the multitude of believers in Antiochia, were called Christians, Act. 11.21.26. So that I accounted them to be Christians children, whose parents, at lest one of them, in external profession, is within the covenant. Gen. 17.10. Faithful, Rom. 4.11. Called, Act. 2.39. ANSWER. I Also take the name of Christians, as I conceive it is taken Act. 11.26. and in the judgement of charity do accounted them to be Christians, that are by their external profession within the covenant, faithful and called. In the writing of the 5 Ministers, where the state of the question is set down, it is expressed, that they would have the children of such parents to be baptised, quos constat esse Christianos', who are manifested to be Christians. But against this Mr. Davenport in his writing to the Classis, excepteth and complaineth, that it was required of him that he should conform unto a particular custom of the Dutch Church, Book of complaints pag. 2. for the unli●●●d baptising of all infants, which were presented in the Church, of 〈◊〉 nation or sect soever, although that either of the parents were Christians, was no otherwise manifest then by their answering Yea, at the 〈◊〉 of the liturgy of Baptism publicly, or by nodding their head, or s●●● other gesture, they secured to be willing. Pag. 5. The same thing he doth afterwards again repeat in the same writing. For answer hereunto consider, 1. It is utterly untrue, that such an unlimited baptising of all in●●●●, of what nation or sect soever, was required of him. For besides the limitation above specified, there is also an other express limitation plainly set down in the writing of the 5 Ministers, approved also by the Classis, viz. If yet any other case fall out, whereby it may seem that the infant presented should not be baptised, that then the judgement of the whole English Presbytery, or also if need be and conveniently it may be done, that the judgement of the Classis of Amsterdam be obtained and heard, and rested in. A man that reads Mr. Davenport his writing, might easily be brought to doubt, whether Turks or jews, Mahometists or Heathens, or infidels of what nation or sect soever, did sometime present their children to baptism, and that it was the custom of the Dutch Church to baptism such being presented, seeing he shows his fear in conforming to the particular custom of the Dutch Church, in the unlimited baptising of all infants presented of what nation or sect soever, etc. But such practices are not allowed in the Dutch Church: and if any such case, or any other apparent cause of scruple had fallen out, then by this writing of the Ministers, it was permitted to Mr. Davenport to have referred the baptism of such infants to further deliberation & judgement of the Eldership or Classis. Preface & p. 6. & 16. & 19 And hereby it may appear how unjustly in this question, both Mr. Davenport and the complainants do use that phrase of promiscuous baptising of all infants without difference etc. 2. That men might be reputed in the covenant by testification of their faith and repentance, though it were by a word or gesture of the body, witnessing their consent thereunto, so far as to procure the admission of their infants, to have the seal of circumcision or baptism, it appeareth from the holy records. Because even this word Yea, is noted by Christ, and accepted by him as a testimony of the will 〈…〉 truth and promise of God, and as a 〈◊〉 of the 〈…〉 for the act of faith and love. Mat. 5.37. & 9.28. & 13.52. job. 21.15. Rev. 22.20. And so the word An●on is ●●●●d by the H. Ghost as 〈◊〉 actual profession of Religious worship, and as an external expression of faith, love and thankfulness accepted of God, Psal. 106.48. 1. Cor. 14.16. Rev. 1.7. & 19.4. with 2. Cor. 1.19.20. Hence it is also, that the people of God in Israël did enter into the Covenant, and renewed and confirmed the Covenant, and professed the Lord to be their God, and themselves to be his people, vowing his service and obedience by the words of Amen, or So be it, or the like short speeches, briefly expressed at propounding of the Covenant: neither could it well be done otherwise, when hundred thousands of them at once did make such Covenant with him, as appeareth from Exod. 19.8. & 24.3.7. Deut. 27.14.15. & 29. 1-10-15. Iosh. 24.24.25. with Num. 1.45.46. etc. So for beckoning or nodding with the head, it is observed in common use, to show the consent or descent of the will in any matter: And the * Annuo. Innuo. Abnuo. Renuo. Latin words in their diverse composition do import the same. The * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Greek words also used by the holy Ghost, to declare how men signified their meanings and their wills, joh. 13.24. Luk. 1.22.62. & 5.7. do import that this was done by a beckoning or nod of the head. And more plainly, the * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. word that signify so to nod the head, is sometimes in our English translation expressed by the word of consent, Act. 18.20. Now seeing the consent of the will is thus declared by this gesture of the body; and seeing as the Apostle shows, where there is a willing mind, there men are accepted of God; 2. Cor. 8. it is therefore no marvel if the worship of God be so often expressed by this external gesture of bowing the head or body, as we read, Exod. 4.31. 1. Chron. 29.20. and 2. Chron. 20.18. Besides this, other the most weighty and solemn Covenants and professions of special persons in the Church, are ordinarily celebrated and confirmed by answering briefly Yea, with bowing of the head or body; as the stipulation of Ministers, Elders and Deacons, when they are publicly received into office before the Congregation; the profession of public repentance, either before or after excommunication by such as have committed special offence; the 〈◊〉 of ●●●ges, etc. All these in the 〈…〉 are 〈◊〉 accomplished, when persons that under●●●● the 〈◊〉 do present themselves before the Congregation, answering Yea unto the questions propounded unto them. 3. To come more particularly unto the places of Scripture here alleged by Mr. Davenport. For those multitude of believers that are called Disciples and Christians, Act. 11.21.26. though it be said, that they believed and turned unto the Lord, yet is it not specified by what words or signs, more or less, they professed their faith and conversion unto God. How can it be proved from hence that such as consented unto the doctrine of the Gospel propounded unto them, by answering Yea unto it, and bowing their heads or bodies, in testimony of their approbation and liking thereof, might not thereupon be admitted unto baptism both they and their infants? For Gen. 17.10. when as in old time circumcised parents brought their infants to be circumcised also, it cannot thence be showed, that more questions were propounded in the examination of them, then are now in the administration of Baptism propounded unto such baptised parents, as do now bring their children to be baptised: or that the children of such had circumcision denied unto them, who shown their consent and willingness in embracing the covenant, by such brief answers and gestures as we speak of. For Rom. 4.11. Abraham is there called the father of all them that believe, whether they were members of a particular visible Church or not. And for aught we find in the holy story, there might be some believers even in Abraham's own time, that were neither members of Abraams' family, nor yet under the government or guidance of any particular Church. If a son or bond-servant of Ephron the Hittite, or of any other Amorite or Canaanite were then brought unto the knowledge of the true God, and to wait for the promise, why might not the infant of such an one have then been circumcised, though not living in a visible Church? And for Act. 2.39. though the promise be made unto such as are called, yet who can show that such are not to be accounted outwardly called, and in some measure within the privilege of the covenant, who being themselves already baptised, and withdrawing themselves from other sects and Churches, do bring their infant's 〈…〉 a public profession of their 〈…〉 the whole Congregation Mr. DAVENPORT. BEside the former 〈◊〉 of a Christian 〈◊〉, Mr. D 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 allegeth this further; that they must be such as 〈◊〉 joy●●● 〈◊〉 some true Church. 1. Cor. 5.12. ANSWER. THe words of the Apostle here alleged are these, For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do ye not judge them that are within? How Mr. Davenport applies this sentence to the question in hand, it is not plainly described by him. It had been good, if he had showed how he had drawn his argument from hence, that the answer might have been framed accordingly. In the mean time let this suffice for answer unto that which is obscurely objected from this place: 1. Of 3 sorts of persons, which may be said to be without, those offer themselves first unto our consideration, that being members of a visible Church, are yet without true faith, and therefore are no members of the invisible Church: Of such Christ speaketh, unto them that are without, all things are done in parables, Mark. 4.11. But such the Apostle in this place doth not speak of: for such being in regard of their external profession within the Covenant, and within the visible Church, might be judged by the same, and censured as occasion required. Such were many in Israël, and are in other Christian Churches. 2. Those in special are without, that are no way Christians, neither in deed nor in profession; such as were the open Infidels and Heathens that lived in Corinth, of such it is said, Walk honestly towards them without, 1. Thess. 4.12. These though they were judged by the word preached, when sometimes they heard it, 1. Cor. 14.24. or by the admonitions and examples of the godly whom they despised, Gen. 19.7.9. Heb. 11.7. yet before they submitted themselves unto the Church, were not to be judged and censured by Ecclesiastical discipline, nor to be avoided as excommunicates, for than must men go out of the world, as the Apostle here shows, 1. Cor. 5.10.12. 3. Those that for the present live not under the discipline and 〈…〉 particular Church, and yet makes profession of 〈…〉 Religion with the true visible Churches, and bring their children 〈◊〉 them to be baptised, making solemn promise to bring 〈◊〉 their children in the faith that is professed in those Churches; of which sort there are a great number in these Low-countrieses, because none here are compelled to the Sacraments, nor to subjection under the discipline: These in special are the persons that in our question are without. These parents, though in regard of that Church where they received their own baptism, and in regard of that Church whereunto they bring their infants to be baptised, they profess and practise some imperfect communion therewith, and therefore in some sense may be said to be of such Churches; yet because for the present they live not within the pale of any Ecclesiastical government, neither are subject unto the discipline, either of one or other Church, in this regard are such here commonly said to be without. Now how Mr. Davenport will deduct and infer from the place alleged, that these kind of parents are not to have the privilege of Christians, so far that their infants may be baptised, that cannot I comprehend: this remains to be manifested by him. Those only, according to the order of these Reformed Churches, are admitted for complete members of the Church, who bringing testimony of their good conversation, after examination and profession of their agreement with us in the same faith and Religion, and after solemn covenant and promise' of submission unto that discipline and government exercised amongst them, have their names published before the whole congregation the Lordsday following, and when no just exception comes against them, are then received and confirmed for members of such particular Churches. But that the Children of these only are to be baptised, that is not made to appear from the sentence of Paul 1. Cor. 5.12. For this third sort of persons without, though their fault be great in not joining unto some particular Church, when opportunity permits; though some through ignorance and error, and some for their carnal case and other sinister respects, do abstain from joining themselves unto the Church: yet even among these also some have more knowledge of the truth, and are more frequent in attending upon the public worship of God, and are otherwise more unblamable in their conversation, than some of those that are members of 〈…〉 members of the Church 〈…〉 of some other Christian Cong●●g●●●●●, 〈…〉 so long as he remained at 〈…〉 of our Church, was to be reckoned among this 〈…〉 that 〈◊〉 said to be without. For (though I make no comparison in respect of personal gifts and graces, yet) in respect of his Church-estate, having left that particular Parish Church in London, whereof he was a member, and having withdrawn himself from under the government of the Church of England, and not standing under the government of any other particular Church Dutch or English here, he was then no complete member of any visible Church, otherwise then those are, about the baptism of whose infants our present question is. Besides these allegations of Scripture, Mr. Davenport allegeth for himself the consent of Divines of the Dutch Churches in their Confessions, and of all Reformed Churches in the harmony of their Confessions, and further he saith, to conclude, all Divines agreed in this. Now although there be a great deal of vain confidence and mistaking in him to apply the testimonies of learned men to the justification of his opinion, wherein he dissenteth from us; yet is not my purpose for this present to enter into a dispute about the diverse judgements of learned men concerning this question. It shall suffice for this time to have answered that which he now objecteth from the Scripture; I being but defendant, and he opponent. He tells in his preamble, how little he hath said in comparison of that which he hath to say, and I do believe it to be so. Yet as occasion shall require (if the Lord permit and assist) my purpose also is, to add something more according to my weakness, for the clearing of this point, hoping that some other more able will be stirred up hereby, to make a more full defence of the truth. Observations touching the PROTESTATION of Mr. DAVENPORT. UPon the coming forth of the Book of Complaints against me, Mr. Davenport immediately sends out a Protestation against it, and signify he could have no rest in his spirit until he had resolved upon this Protestation. The special matters contained therein are a threefold Protestation, a threefold Quaere, a threefold Confession, and a threefold Request. The sum of his threefold Protestation is; 1. That he knew not the Publisher; 2. that he gave no consent to this Publishing of it; 3. that the Publisher to make satisfaction for his great injury, aught either to revoke his books and burn the whole impression, or print an other for the public acknowledgement of his fault therein. For these 3 Protestations: 1. There be diverse reasons why men should believe Mr. Davenport herein; and therefore do I also give credit unto him in each of them. 2. Can he also have made Protestation, that he had not first given out these things by writing, and so filled the hand of him that published them again in print, it had been more honour to him, and more peace to our Church. 3. Observe the just reward of the inordinate affection which this Publisher showed in contending for Mr. Davenport. By Mr. Davenport himself sentence is pronounced against him unknown, that he aught to bear his shame before the world in a printed book, to be monument of his injury done in printing. 4. Observe what little conscience this Publisher makes of Mr. Davenport his counsel and exhortation, to procure the peace of his soul, in refusing to make such Public Satisfaction in the acknowledgement of his fault, as Mr. Davenport requireth of him. The Publisher in his complaint against me, * Sect. 40. complaineth of me for depriving him of such heavenly means of edification as he had by Mr. Davenport. But lo, how he wilfully now depriveth himself of the fruit of that heavenly means, choosing rather to continued in the guilt of his sin without due repentance, then to give glory unto God, by humbling of himself in the confession of his sin, according to the advice of Mr. Davenport. 5. Observe 〈…〉 spirits, and not to 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 the first. Mr. Davenport a● first gave way and opened a do●e of opportunity 〈◊〉 the Publisher, to spread abroad matter of constitution, 〈◊〉 he c●●●●ded his writings either to him or others. 〈◊〉 to whose hands be committed them, but he knew not to whose hands they should come. He gave consent for making the matter of his writing known one way, and that produced another way of Publication beyond his consent. So he could not shut the door which he had opened. THe sum of his threefold confession is; 1. He confesseth that about 6 months since, having been often provoked by injurious reports, etc. and having been much solicited by particular friends etc. upon such necessity and much importunity, he was constrained to set down those particulars in writing, etc. 2. He professeth that no man hath the original copy but himself, and that for aught he knows he never gave it to more than two to peruse, etc. only to enable them to give private satisfaction to those that should require it of them, and so to enable those to satisfy others in a private way, etc. 3. He professeth that from hence it will follow, that he is altogether innocent in this matter, which as he knew not of it, till it was brought unto him in print, so he utterly dislikes both for the unseasonableness of the work, and for the unreasonable and uncharitable bitterness of the Publisher. Touching this threefold confession or profession, observe 1. The complaints of Mr. Davenport, touching such injurious reports as are by him mentioned in his writing, are already showed to be unjust. 2. If provocation by injurious reports had prevailed with me, as far as it did with Mr. Davenport, then should I also have made answer in writing to such reports, as were often brought unto me, and communicated the same with others, to enable them to satisfy others also. This I did not, but rather suffered much wrong. 3. Observe how solicitation by particular friends prevailed with Mr. Davenport, to do that which hath caused so great offence: Let men beware of importunity of friends provoking unto strife. If Mr. Davenport should tell who these friends were, it would happily appear more plainly what little reason he had so to have been carried away by them. 4. Though Mr. Davenport never gave his writing to more than too to peruse; that might be as much as if he had given it to 20; wh●●● those two might spread it abroad to as many and 〈◊〉; as 〈◊〉 also come to pass. 5. Though no man hath the original copy but himself; this excuseth Mr. Davenport no more, then if he that hath made a libel, and given the same to others, which have transcribed copies thereof, and spread them abroad, first by writing and then by printing, should say with Mr. Davenport, yet mine own was returned unto me again, and I have it in my keeping: no man hath the original copy but myself. What helps this, when 500 copies thereof be printed & dispersed abroad? 6. Whereas Mr. Davenport professeth his intent to give private satisfaction; in a private way: Let it be observed how private this way was, when as in the postscript after his letter to the Classis, he useth this manner of speech, Let the Reader judge what I could say less or more mildly, etc. For is not this the phrase and style of books published for readers? And were it not absurd so to speak of a writing which is not intended for the view of readers? Saith he not also in his new preamble to that letter, that he translated it for the satisfaction of the members of the English Church? And could that be kept private, which he intended should be made known to so many persons? And even herein this part of his Protestation, doth he not show his intent was to satisfy the Dutch in that City, viz. of Amsterdam, and some of the members of that Church, and many of our nation in other parts of these Countries, who (as he saith) he was informed, that they were by misreports prejudiced against him? Doth not this also accord with the practice of his special friend the Publisher, who hath also caused this writing to be translated into Dutch for their satisfaction? Can all this be done, and not be counted a public work? Who knows not that matters are published abroad, not only by printing, but by writing also, when one is appointed to satisfy an other, and they others again? This dealing of Mr. Davenport suits well with the Emblem or Picture printed in the Title-page of his Protestation, where Flying Fame is printed, and portrayed as a woman with her wings spread abroad, mounting aloft in the air, her Trumpet in her mouth, and her cheeks swollen with blowing of it. For even this kind of communicating his writing, was enough to raise up and to carry forth the same of these actions: Those two selected instruments for satisfaction, 〈…〉 to publish 〈…〉 the printing thereof. 7. This kind of Pri●●●●ay, 〈◊〉 Mr. Davenport calleth it, hidden to me, and made known to 〈◊〉, the ●●●e pri●●●e and secret it was, the greater was the injury unto me, so ●o spread 〈◊〉 complaints against me. Hereby I was accused, and could not co●● to answer: hereby it came to pass, that I might justly complain with David and jeremy: Psal. 35.15 jer. 11.19. They assembled themselves against me, and I know not: they tore me and ceased not. I was like a lamb or a bullock that is brought to the slaughter, and I knew not that they had devised thus against me. Though I heard of reproach enough, yet I knew not of this devise by underhand-writings to propagate reproach, and to fill the mouths of slanderers against me. Would Mr. Davenport have dealt ingenuously and Christianly with me, he should first have sent his writing unto me; and those his two instruments, whom he sought to enable that they again might enable others, to give satisfaction in a private way, aught to have acquainted me with it, to have seen whether I could not by an other writing have satisfied them. This their private way, this underhand-practise; which by his confession continued about some 6 months before the printed book came forth, and might have continued longer, if this Publisher had not beyond his expectation brought it to light; what was this else but an indirect and disordered course, to undermine me secretly and in the dark? 8. Let Mr. Davenport consider whether there be not partiality in his proceed. For if he thought it needful to make these writings for the satisfaction of the members of the English Church here, whereof he is neither member nor Minister, how much more aught he to have done it for satisfying of the members of his Parish-Church in England for the leaving of it; to give a reason of his proceed there, which he knows are disliked by many? Why hath he not under his hand in writing given copy of the passages therein, and appointed some to propagate the knowledge thereof as well as here; that so (as he speaks of this) the Reader might judge the better of the whole business? 9 Observe how in the midst of these practices, tending so manifestly 〈…〉, Mr. Davenport yet 〈◊〉 a profession of 〈◊〉 have and 〈◊〉, ●●●ling us how he did aspect when God would s●●●ly ●●der and dispose the spirits of Pastor and people in that Church, to ●●ity and concord between themselves, etc. and that he doth still hope and pray for it. But is this the word of a peacemaker, or peace-seeker, to spread abroad matter of dissension? Had he any just ground to hope for unity by such reports, serving to disunite the hearts of people? Is this a sweet order to dispose the spirits of Pastor and people to concord, by making complaints unto the people against their Pastor? Yea what else hath he done in this writing, but played the part of an evil instrument, coming betwixt Pastor & People, to irritate their minds, and to provoke unto further contention by a vain discourse, of seeking to prove that he was not desired by me; by teaching the people to complain after his example, and so ●●rcing their Pastor for his own defence, to publish an Apology against unjust complaints? 10. Whereas Mr. Davenport in this speech for unity & concord, talks indefinitely of some conclusions and ways of advancing our mutual good and comfort, agreeable to the Gospel & rule which Christ hath left for his Churches to walk by: What Mr. Davenport means by these conclusions & ways, I know not. But this I know, that Mr. Davenport his way can never advance our mutual good, nor procure our comfort, being so directly opposite and contrary to the Gospel, and to the rule which Christ hath left us to walk by: for in his forenamed private way of satisfaction, in stead of admonition of the supposed offender, either alone or with witnesses, according to the * Mat. 18.15.16. rule of Christ, he substitutes two tale-bearers, not to admonish the offender, nor to help to convince him, but by a writing communicated to them to satisfy others, as he pretendeth in a private way. In stead of telling the Church according to the rule of Christ, Ibi. vers. 17. his way is to have the Church to be informed by certain whisperers from one to an other, for many months together, without knowledge of the offender, or any due proceeding according to the Gospel. His obscure and dark speeches are such, as may lightly be drawn to strengthen the discontented persons among us in their opposition against me, and against the Classis, and against the government and discipline of these Churches, with whom we are united. For what are these Conclusions & ways of advancement he aims 〈…〉 for our help and 〈…〉 that the Conclusions of the 〈◊〉, touching the 〈◊〉 among us, to be the way of unity and concord, not repugnant to the Gospel: ●●d Mr. Davenport and the complainants ●●●●od therein, our unity 〈◊〉 concord had been established and confirmed. Though these conclusions did not serve for the admittance of Mr. Davenport as a Pastor among 〈◊〉, yet they s●●●ed to conclude our Peace, without any new project of his. Lastly, observe how Mr. Davenport, although he confess touching the Title of the book and the publishing thereof, that he utterly dislikes it, both for the unseasonableness of the work, and for the unreasonable & uncharitable bitterness of the Publisher; yet he speaks not the lest word against the matter of the book, nor against the authors thereof, nor against those many false and slanderous assertions of the complainants. He might as safely and without rebuke unto himself, have spoken all this that is here confessed by him, though he himself had written the whole book, and subscribed his name with the rest of the complainants unto the second part of the book, as well as he did unto the first. For first as for the unseasonableness of the work, it is well known that some great adversaries of the truth have complained sometimes of their own fellows, for printing & publishing their own opinions unseasonably, before matters were ripe, and the way prepared for the receiving of them. And further for the unreasonable & uncharitable bitterness of the Publisher, as he here speaks; and for the harsh & unsavoury language used by the Publisher, as he speaks in the preamble to his Protestation, though the Publisher be many ways guilty therein, yet is Mr. Davenport guilty of great partiality in reproving of him alone, when as the other subscribers also are guilty and partakers in the transgression as well as he. Why then doth William. Be. alone bear the rebuke from Mr. Davenport? Why are not Law. Co. Tho. Fl. ja. Cr. Io. Pol. and the rest rebuked by him also? Though William. Be. the Publisher have been more rude than the rest, yet for the matter of the book, the other are as deep in the guilt of those unreasonable and uncharitable slanders contained therein. If their complaints be just, then is the Title just: If the Title be vile, then are their assertions vile that justify the Title. Had Mr. Davenport 〈…〉 conscience, then as he had 〈…〉 had resolved upon this his Protestation, so he 〈◊〉 also have had no rest nor full contentment therein, unless 〈…〉 entirely and sincerely protested against the book itself, the writ 〈◊〉 the underwriters thereof, as well as against the Title & the publishe● of this Pamphlet. FOr his threefold Quaere, wherein he wisheth the Publisher to inform himself of these 3 things; 1. Whether he be not an injurious one, etc. 2. Whether he be not a sour of discord among brethren, etc. 3. Whether he be not a buisy body, one that busieth himself in other men● matters, etc. Observe, 1. how confused and indistinct these 3 Quaeres are, each one of them being confounded with the other two. For the first, under the T●●● of injurious one, are comprehended both he that s●●th discord, and he that is a buisy body. For the second, by ●●●og discord among brethren, men are both injurious and buisy bodies. For the third to be a buisy body in such manner as Mr. Davenport here specifyes, what is it else but to be both injurious and sowers of discord? But let us follow the order propounded. 2. Observe more particularly wherein the Publisher of this book hath been injurious. He was injurious To Mr. Davenport, in printing that which he wrote, without his consent. To some of his fellow-complaynants, to publish their writing. For though all of them be guilty in subscribing to the writing: yet diverse of them profess themselves to be highly offended at the printing thereof. To all of them, in having the Brownists to print it with such a schismatical addition in the end. To me, in spreading abroad so many untruths against me, as are before noted. To our whole Congregation, to blot the same with report of infamous contention, faction, etc. To the Classis, in defaming their government and proceed. To the Magistrates of this City, in publishing an unjust complaint against that which was done by them. To all Reformed Churches, in publishing complaints against 〈…〉. 〈◊〉 all that 〈…〉, and desire the same discipline that is ●●●sed in these Churches, this their book being a stumbling-block 〈◊〉 in the way. To all that are grieved for the offence arising by this fact, he being cause of their grief. To all that take pleasure in these offences, he being a means to harden them in sin. 3. Observe, that as the Publisher hath been injurious many ways, so Mr. Davenport hath been injurious many ways, both unto the Publisher himself, and to others also: and this according to his threefold Quaere propounded unto the Publisher; for 1. For injuriousnes; As he that puts a sharp knife into the hand of a little child, is thereby injurious unto that child: so was Mr. Davenport that framed a writing like a sharp pointed knife, and put it into the hand of this rude Publisher, either mediately or immediately, giving him thereby occasion and opportunity to publish the same, and so to wound himself & others thereby. Whereas Mr. Davenport desires the Publisher seriously to consider, whether some by respect or secret distemper, had not biased his spirit a wrong way, or imbittred it too much: it is apparent that Mr. Davenport his writing was a bias set upon the spirit of the Publisher, to make it run that way it did in the reproach of me; and whatsoever secret or open distemper was in him before, this example of Mr. Davenport in all reason must needs both embitter and embolden him the more unto this exploit. 2. For sowing of discord among brethren which is so hateful, which Mr. Davenport amplifyes by similitudes of fire and water, by the danger of opening fluses in these Netherlands; what were those two persons, to whom he communicated his writing for satisfaction of the members of the English Church and others, but as two Sluices opened by him, from which the waters of strife might flow forth with danger of drowning many? What else but two sowers of discord appointed by Mr. Davenport, each of them furnished with coals of fire to inflame many against me? For fire works, hath not Mr. Davenport first digged the trenches, and made mines under the ground, and scattered gunpowder therein by his underhand writing, whereunto W. Be. gave fire by publishing the same, and so blown up the mine? Mr. Davenport prays here that the 〈…〉 but had he been careful to resist Satan at the first, he would not 〈◊〉 done him such a service, by filling the mouths of these pe●● with such store of complaints as he did. 3. For being a buisy body, Mr. Davenport asks the Publisher, what calling he hath to interpose himself thus publicly, etc. And yet who more than Mr. Davenport hath given him a calling (such an one as it is) to interpose himself in spreading abroad the writing, which he communicated unto his two buisy bodies, to the end they might upon occasion divulge the same? Yea in this very Quaere doth not Mr. Davenport give a kind of warrant for publishing these complaints, brought to the Consistory, when as he disallows the publishing thereof, with this limitation only, before matters have been there discussed & determined, or at lest, before the issue and conclusion, which there shall be put to the question, hath been sufficiently demanded and expected. Doth not this imply, that though not before, yet after this done, there would be a warrant to publish these matters? And seeing the complainants have been so importunate in their demands about this business, as is before showed, and think they have expected and waited long enough; what wonder if such a speech as this, should make them conceive that they had now some warrant to publish their complaints unto the world? And further howsoever the matters published, do not only concern our Church, and the special things contained in these complaints, have been already judged and determined by the Classis; yet seeing Mr. Davenport hath been an instrument to publish some of them by writing, no marvel if this Publisher thought that the example of Mr. Davenport was some warrant unto him to publish them in print also. HIs threefold Request is, 1. To me, that I would rest satisfied with his ingenuous profession in this particular, etc. 2. To the Publisher, that he would affix this sheet of paper [his Protestation] in stead of a Postscript to his book, or disperse it among all persons to whose hands his book shall come, or is come, etc. or make one good fire of both. 3. To all men to whose hands the other book shall come, that they will speedily sand this after it, or stitch this with it, etc. Touching his Request to me, I do willingly yield thereunto, and do rest satisfied for this particular, that he knew not of the printing 〈…〉 I should easily have believed, that for h●● 〈…〉 the would not have printed the book: yet do I hold him 〈…〉, for th●● underhand publishing of his written book, by 〈…〉 ●●ed so great wrong. 〈◊〉 his requests to the Publisher, and to all other men to 〈…〉 the other book shall come; what will or power they 〈…〉 accomplish them, I leave them to answer as occasion 〈◊〉. TO conclude, this printed Protestation of Mr. Davenport containeth in it a threefold Public Provocation of me, to answer his writings more than I had before. 1. By avouching herein that he hath written nothing in that, d●●●●ration but the truth, which he is also ready (as he saith) to confirm a● occasion shall require. This new asseveration and beating of the former reports into the head of the Readers, I esteem as a new challenge binding me to answer that declaration, and to show the untruth and injustice of those reports spread abroad against me therein. 2. By intimating further matter that he hath in store beside that which he hath already written against me, when as he tells how he concealed other things which he might have added for his further clearing, unless more public provocation should make it necessary to publish all together, which he hath hitherto forborn. A threatening insinuation like unto that which is in his preamble to his letter unto the Classis, and like unto those that have elsewhere been uttered by him. 3. Howsoever his reposited his complaints against the Classis, and against me, were before spread abroad first by his writing, and then by the printed book, yet this new printed Protestation make all more public, coming to the hands of sundry persons that sa● not the other book before, causing them to inquire further after these things. This further spreading of the matter hath moved m● the more to give answer unto him. My desire is that the truth might be spread as far as the untrue and unjust reports that are gone out before. And the God of truth grant this. AMEN. FINIS. Pag. 71. for Section XXVI. read Section XXVII.