LORD BISHOPS, NONE OF THE LORDS BISHOPS. OR A SHORT discourse, wherein IS PROVED THAT prelatical JURISDICTION, IS NOT OF DIVINE Institution, but forbidden by Christ himself, as Heathenish, and branded by his Apostles for Antichristian; wherein also sundry notable passages of the Arch-Prelate of Canterbury in his late book, entitled, A Relation of a Conference, &c. are by the way met withal.  MATH. 20. 25, 26. Jesus said to his Disciples, ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise Authority upon them: But it shall not be so among you: But whosoever will be Great among you, let him be your Servant. 1 Joh. 2. 18, 19 Even as there are many Antichrists: They went out from us, but they were not of us. BERN. Praelati Pilati: non Pastores, sed Impostores. 
Printed in the month of November, 1640.   

TO THE HIGH AND honourable COURT OF PARLIAMENT, THE nobility AND gentry now Assembled in both the Houses, Grace, Mercy and Peace be multiplied.  
MOST Noble Senare, and right worthy Pattiots, who both fear your GOD, and honour your King; He who truly honours you, and daily prays for a blessed success of this your Meeting, humbly presents you here with a Cause, which well weighed in your maturest judgements, may prove one of those greatest Parliament Businesses, which your most pious and prudent thoughts and Consultations are taken up withal. When you have perused this short Discourse concerning prelatical Authority, whence it is, and if it shall appear by clear evidence of Scripture, justly compared with their prelatical properties, and practices, that they are the Seed of Antichrist, the Mystery of Iniquity; a more than Heathenish Tyranny over souls, bodies, and estates; a mere enmity (but under the veil of hyprocrisy) against Christ, against his Word, against his Ministers, against his People, and the Salvation of their Soulee; yea against the peace and prosperity of Civil States, by their Factious and Seditious practices, and the like: Your wisdom, your Piety, your zeal for GOD, your Love to Christ, your Loyalty to your King, your tender compassion towards your poor Country, your Christian care of your own souls, and of your Posterities, will all of them call and cry for a serious Consultation, and a speedy resolution what is to be done herein, as you shall apprehend the Prosperity, or Calamity of this whole Church and State, and the happy or miserable issues of Parlliaments to depend upon it. A word to the wise. What I would further say, I will turn into continual Supplication to the Great precedent of counsels JESUS CHRIST, that he will send his Spirit of wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of council and Might, the Spirit of Knowledge, and the fear of the Lord: that Antichrists throne being quite cast out, and Christ's alone set up, the King may be established in perpetual Peace and Prosperity to himself and royal Posterity, till the coming of Him, who shall put an end to Times and kingdoms; and with whom all that truly serve him here, shall reign for evermore.  
Your Honours and worship's faithful Orator till death.   

LORD BISHOPS, NONE OF THE LORDS BISHOPS.  
CHAPTER 1.  
Of the State of the Question: Whether Bishops be de jure divino, of divine Authority?  
OF Bishops, or Episkopoi, Episcopi, so called, so commended in Scripture, we doubt not, but they are de jure divino. But what are those Bishops? Not Diocesan Lord Bishops, so commonly called. For of such we nowhere read of in Scripture; as we shall fully prove anon. But those, whom the Scripture calleth Episcopos, are Presbyters, or Ministers of the Word, lawfully Called, and set over their several Congregations respectively. Such only are Bishops jure divino. But as for such, as are Katagrestikoes, abusively styled Bishops, to wit, Diocesan or Lord Bishops, there is not so much as any one footstep of them in the Scripture. And therefore as these have not the true Nature and Calling of a Scripture-Bishop: So neither ought they to usurp the Name and Title of Bishop. But as they are of human invention and institution only, yea of human presumption (as old Father Jerome saith) and not of divine Institution: So let them be known by such Titles only, as man hath given them, as namely Prelates &c. Prelati, or Prelates are so called, because they are preferred, or rather prefer themselves before and above others, that are God's Ministers. And thus they participate of the prelacy of the Great Antichrist, who is that 
* 2 Thes. 2. 4.  supereiromenos (as the Apostle styles him) he that exalts himself, above all that is called God. He is also called in the same place ' oh a'ntikeímenos, that Adversary, called by John,' o Antíkristos, that Antichrist, to wit, that Adversary against Christ. And agreeable hereunto is that other Title of Prelates, namely Antistes in the Latin, which they interpret a witness: but it may rather be derived from the Greek; Anti is not a Latin Preposition, but Greek, and signifies against. So as Antistes, is one that stands against; and it may answer to Antistasiastès, one of the adverse Faction, or on the contrary side, as all Prelates are Antistasiastai, adversaries against Christ, or Antichrists, which you will; as will further appear. But we will content ourselves with the Title of Prelate in this our whole ensuing discourse, as being none of the Scripture-Bishops.  
Now concerning Prelates, the learned Papists themselves are not, cannot be resolved, that they are jure divino, of divine institution immediately, but only at the most mediately, deriving their prelacy from the Pope, as all his canonised Saints do their saintship; saying, that the Pope hath his supremacy jure divino, both as Christ's Vicar, and Peter's Successor: but all Prelates derive their prelacy from no further a fountain, than the Pope, as from the wellhead, or the Head of the hierarchical body, which gives them their lively motion, as the Head to the natural members. This very point of prelatical Jurisdiction was canvased and controverted in the council of Trent, and held by some learned there, to be but jure Pontificio, by Pontifician Authority resident in the Pope: 
Histor. Concilii Trident.  whom therefore they call Patrem Patrum, the Father of Fathers, as being the Father of the whole Paternity of Prelates. And our Prelates of England may remember, that till Hen. 8. cast the Pope out of England, the Prelates held all their Jurisdiction from the Pope, and their Authority was but translated from the Pope, to the King, So as passing from one man to another, it was merely human still. And the great Primate, the now Champion of the Church of England as he bears himself in his late Book (his Relation of the Conference) confesseth thus much, That among these (to wit, 
‡ Conference pag. 176, 177.  Bishops in their several diocese, as there he names them) there was effectual subjection respectively grounded upon Canon and Positive Law in their several Quarters. Where by effectual subjection he means subjection of the Prelates in every Province to the Arch-Prelate, or Primate: then he confesseth, that Archiprelaticall jurisdiction is grounded upon Canon and Positive Law, and so consequently not upon the Holy Scriptures, as being jure divino. And thus much he confessed in open Court at the High Commission at Doctor Bastwicks' Censure, that no one of the Apostles had jurisdiction one over another; and so consequently not an Arch-Prelate over other Prelates, jure divino, but only jure Canonico, & Positivo, by Canon and Positive Law. Arch-Prelates therefore have no jurisdiction by divine Institution. Or if he mean it of subjection of Ministers in every Diocese to their Prelates respectively, that this also is grounded upon Canon and Positive Law: though so he should say truly, yet in so saying, he should contradict himself, as where he saith elsewhere, That Christ thought it fitter to govern the Church (Universal) Aristocratically by diverse, rather than by one viceroy. As much to say, rather by many Popes, then by one. 
Confe. pag. 200.  And this (saith he I believe to be true. So as he makes it an Article of his Faith, That Prelates are jure divino. Yet but a little before in the same page, it is not certain that the whole Militant Church is a kingdom: for there are no mean ones (saith he) which think our Saviour Christ left the Church Militant in the hands of the Apostles, and their Successors, in an aristocratical, or rather mixed government, &c. So as what others, and those no mean ones think, the Prelate believes. And the Government, which some think, and he believes to be aristocratical, he understands to be prelatical, which (saith he) is aristocratical, or rather a mixed Government. What means he by a mixed Government? Namely, partly aristocratical and partly monarchical, for of those two he there speaketh. His meaning then is, that a Prelate is in part in Monarch. But where do we find that Christ thought it fittest to govern his Church by prelates, that the Prelate is so confident to believe it? It seems he is one of Christ's Cabinet Counsellors, that he is so intimately privy to his thoughts. For surely Christ hath nowhere left the impression of any such thought of his in his written word. But I suppose the Prelate doth but presume so, or charitably believe Christ thought so. Me thinks he should not so believe it, as to write upon it, I believe this is true. But thus (I say) this faith of his overthrows the credit of his former Saying, That Prelates with their effectual Subjection, are grounded upon Canon, 
Confer. pag.  or Positive Law, and so have no Authority from Christ (as the Prelate a little before affirmeth) of what force is his Canon? For there speaking of the Pope he saith, Nay out of all doubt, 't is not the least reason, why de facto, he hath so little success, because de jure he hath no power given. But how then is it, that some few 
* Confer pag. 183.  pages before he saith, that some one must be Ordine Primus, to avoid confusion? and he speaks there of the roman Prelate. It is then of necessity, that there must be one Ordine Primus to avoid confusion in the Catholic Church Militant (which elsewhere he makes to be visible, and hierarchical, or prelatical) then did not Christ leave so much expressed in writing, but to Canon and Positive Law? But perhaps Christ thought it best: and the Prelate so believes. Thus we see here is nothing, but Riddles, Ambiguities, and Contradictions, or interferings with our Prelate. What course then shall we take for a clear resolution of the Question, That Prelates (as themselves affirm) are jure divino? Certainly, if they be jure divino, they must show good proof for it in the written word of God. And to this Rule we must hold them, and to this only. For it were to tread an endless maze, to go about to prove a Divine Title, or Authority out of the Volumes of human writings, or ecclesiastical Histories. They can tell us de facto what hath been: but that Prelates are de jure divine, that we must search for in the Sacred Records of Divine writ. If there we find it, well and good: but if there it be not, but the contrary: then all human writings are in this point to be rejected, as of no credit, or value. Come we therefore to the Scripture, which will clearly tell us what Christ thought of this matter.   

CHAP. II.  
Wherein is proved, That CHRIST expressly condemneth all prelacy, or hierarchy, as flatly forbidding it to his Apostles and Disciples.  
MATH. 20. 29, &c. Then came to him the Mother of Zebedee's children, with her Sons worshipping him, and desiring a certain thing of him. And he said unto her, what wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit the one on thy right hand, and the other on thy lest in thy kingdom. But Jesus answered and said. Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the Cup, that I shall drink of, and to be baptised with the baptism, that I am baptised with? They say unto him, we are able. And he saith unto them, ye shall drink indeed of my Cup, and be baptised with the baptism, that I am baptised with: but to sit on my right hand, and on my left, is not mine to give, but it shall be given to them, for whom it is prepared of my Father. And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren. But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know, that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your Servant. Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.  
In these words, as we see the mind of these, as yet carnal Disciples: So on the other side we see the mind of Christ, and what he thought of Prelacy. For Prelacy is that, which they make such a solemn suit for. They ambitiously affect Cathedram, a Prelates chair, or Throne: they make suit to sit, and that in the most prime Seat, on the right, and left hand of Christ. And these two suitors were Christ's Kinsmen, James and John. A fair motive for promotion to a Prelacy. For as the Saying is, 

Dicere vis, Praesto? De sanguine Praesulis esto.   

Wouldst thou have Church dignity?  
the prelates Kinsman thou must be.   Or according to those old Verses: 

Quatuor, Ecclesias, his Portis, itur ad omnes:  
Sanguinis, & Simonis, Praesulis, atque Dei.  
Prima patet Claris: nummatis altera: Charis  
Tertia, sed raris janua quarta patet.   

Through these four Gates all church's ways are trod  
Of Birth: of Simon: Prelate: and of God.  
The first for Nobles: next for golden worth.  
For prelate's Kin, the third: for few the fourth.    
These two brethren would enter into the chief cathedrals by the gate of Nobility, as they are Christ's near Kinsmen, and so descending of the blood royal. And in hope the better to speed, they get their Mother to speak, who with Christ was not a little gracious. But besides the absurdity of this their suit (for Christ told them, ye know not what ye ask) they come in as unfit a season, and upon as unsuitable an occasion for such a suit, as possibly could be. For in the very next words going before, Christ had but newly told them of his Death at Jerusalem, saying, Behold we go up to Jerusalem, and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief Priests and Scribes, and they shall condemn him to death: and shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to Scourge, and to crucify him, &c. And in the next words they come to make their suit. Nor only here, but in other places of the evangelists this is constantly noted of the Disciples, that when Christ was telling them of his suffering, and death, they were still harping upon this string, which of them should be the greatest. As we may read, Mark 9 ver. 30. to 34. and Luk. 9 ver. 43. to 46. Yea (Luke 22.) when they were at the Last Supper, and Christ had newly told them, that one of them should betray him, they were instantly again at their philoneikía, a hotly contending about Prelacy: as ver. 21. to 24. As if they would contend, which of them should betray him. So as still they took as bad a Season for their suit, as might be. But in Matthew (Chap. 20. 19) Christ told them also of his Resurrection, which might give him a fair hint for their suit. But alas, poor souls; they as yet 
* Mark 9 32. Luke 9 45.  understood nothing at all, either of his Crucifying, or of his Rising again. And again it is to be noted, that after the Lord was risen again, and they had received the Holy Ghost, they never made any such suit, or had any such contention, or ambition among themselves. Then they were become other men, never so much as thinking of any such vanity, as a Prelacy; they now saw, that Christ's kingdom in its military condition admitted not of prelatical chairs to sit at their ease, and to enjoy their pomp, pleasure, and riches of the world. Their contention was then, which should be the greatest in pains taking in his Ministry, and in undergoing greatest afflictions for Christ, and the gospel, and in winning most souls to Christ, and the like. But (I say) before Christ was risen again, they were carnal, carnally minded, they dreamed of a temporal, and worldly kingdom, wherein they would be chief. And such a kingdom indeed is that, which hath chairs of Prelacy, and Preeminence, such as they blindly aimed at. And yet as blind as they were, their 
* Mark. 9 33, 34.  Conscience made them ashamed to confess to Christ what it was, that they reasoned of by the way; for they had been at it, which of them should be the greatest.  
Well, we have heard of their suit: now for Christ's answer Ye know not (saith he) what ye ask. You know not the nature of that kingdom of mine, which in this world is not a kingdom of external pomp, glory, and greatness, but a kingdom of grace, humility, patience, and wholly spiritual, a kingdom not of ease and pleasure, as to sit in chairs of State, but of painstaking, of labour and travel in your Ministry, of contempt of the world, and of suffering manifold afflictions, and even death itself, for my Names sake. And therefore Christ addeth here: Are ye able to drink of the Cup, that I drink of? &c. And they answering: We are: he adds; Ye shall indeed drink of the Cup, and be baptised with the baptism, that I am baptised with: that is, you must think of other matters, when you come into my kingdom, then of any such worldly greatness as you dream of; you must prepare your feet for the fetters, your backs for the whip, your bellies for hunger and thirst, your bodies for nakedness, your stomachs to drink and digest the bitter Cup of death, and to be dipped over head and ears in floods and Seas of afflictions. Are ye able to do this? Alas, poor souls, as yet they were novices in Christ's school, they would be of the highest form, before they had learned the very first Principles of the catechism, or the A, B, C. of the cross of Christ.  
But, saith Christ, Ye shall drink of my Cup, &c. that is, after ye have fulfiled your ministerial Course, and suffered afflictions, and drunk death's Cup, and therewith have been baptised, than a place shall be proved for you in my kingdom of glory, such as my Father hath appointed for you, and for all my Disciples, so as in whom the greater improvement of the 
* Luk. 19 16, 17, 18, 19 Math. 25. 16, 17, 18, &c.  Talents of Grace, committed to your trust, is found, the greater preferment in Glory he shall have, each according to his proportion yet so, as every good and faithful Servant, shall enter into his Master's joy, in 
‡ Psal. 16. 11.  whose presence is the fullness of joy, and at whose right hand there are pleasures for evermore. But for any such thing as you ask, it is not mine to give, I have no such Commission from my Father to bestow upon you any such thing, as worldly Prelacy; that's no part of my kingdom, nor of the administration thereof. But all that are found faithful in the kingdom of Grace, shall in the kingdom of Glory sit with me at my father's right hand for evermore. Whereas on the contrary, such as turn my kingdom of Grace into a kingdom of Pleasure, pride and ease, as they due which hunt after, and enjoy the preferments of the world, to those I say, 
‡ Luk. 6. 24, 25, 26.  Woe to you that are rich for you have received your Consolation. Woe to you that are full: for you shall hunger. Woe to you that laugh now: for ye shall mourn, and weep: Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you: for so did their Fathers to the false Prophets. Hence we may note by the way, that Christ applies this his whole Speech to such especially as are false Prophets; that wallow in ease and pleasure, as we know all Prelates do; who therefore shall be ranked among the voluptuous and salacious goats at Christ's left hand when he shall say unto them, go ye cursed, &c. For as one said, Qui Praelatum quaerit in terris, invenit confusionem in Coelis. He that seeks Prelacy on earth, shall find confusion in heaven. And we see here, that Christ hath no such prelacy to give; he convinces his Disciples of great blindness, in such their ambition. Christ then to be the Author and giver of any such prelacy. Prelacy therefore is not jure divino, as from Christ's Ordinance. For prelacy always is attended with a long Silken train, goodly Palaces, rich revenues, great Grace in Princes Courts, and what not that the world can afford? Quo jure then? From what Title do Prelates hold? Namely, from him who said 
* Luk. 46, 7.  All these things are mine, and to those that will fall down and worship me, I give them: that is, All that will be Prelates, and so will be my Servants in oppressing God's Word, in persecuting Christ's Saints and Ministers, in exercising their Lordly jurisdiction over the Consciences of God's people, captiving them with manifold ceremonies of will-worship, to the destruction of Christ's kingdom, of man's Salvation, and of that liberty from all spiritual bondage, the redemption from which cost Christ his best blood: to those I will give rich Prelacies, goodly houses and Palaces, a Princely train and Retinue, a Lordly revenue, and all the pleasures and contentments, which the world can afford. And thus we have found out the very Source of this Egyptian Nilus, the prime Author, and Patron of all such prelacy, as falsely pretends its Title to be de jure divino, yea even from Christ himself.  
It followeth in the Text ver. 24. And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren. Observe here of these Disciples, as yet carnal, some are ambitious, and the rest envious. For all of them before Christ's Resurrection, were ambitious of prelacy; as we read in the place forecited. So as hence we may note, that such as affect, and are ambitious of prelacy, they are carnal men, which savour the things of the flesh, worldly minded, such as the Apostle speaks of, that 
§ Phil. 3. 18, 19  are enemies to the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things. They have a wisdom indeed, but 
† lamb. 3. 15.  such as is not from above, but is earthly, sensual, and devilish, as James speaketh. And whereupon speaks he it? In the former verse he had said, If ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth. And this was the wisdom of these carnal Disciples, they were ambitious, and envious one against another; yea they did a'ganaktein, stomach and malign one another in the point of Prelacy. For ambition and envy are two inseparable twins, like those of Hypocrates, they are borne together, live together, and die together. And as Lames in the former place addeth, For where envying and strife is, there is confusion, kai pan phaulon pragma, and every evil work. Now to apply this to our Prelates: what men in the world more ambitious of prelacy, and more envious one against another? In those Primitive times, at the first council of Nice, what bundles and farthels of complaints did those Prelates bring one against another? and all this arose from their ambition and envy, each seeking precedency of his Sea before another. And the fire was so kindled, that had not Constantine the Emperor caused all the Bills of complaints to be cast into the fire together, it had been enough to have set all the world in a combustion. And the Prelate of Canterbury in his said Book confesseth, 
* Confer. pag. 176.  that the only difficulty was to accommodate the places and precedencies of Bishops among themselves. And afterwards, what a hot stir was between John of Constantinople, and GREGORY of Rome, for the precedency of their Seas, and for the Supreme Headship itself? And heretofore between the Prelates of Canterbury and York for the universal Metropolitanship over all England?  
But let us further harken to what Christ saith: But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority over them. But it shall not be so among you. And Luke expresseth it thus: The Kings of the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them, and they that exercise authority upon them, are called Benefactors. But ye shall not be so. All is to one effect. Which is, Christ here forbids his Disciples to exercise any such Dominion, or Auhortity, or Lordship, either over one another, or upon his Church, as Heathen Princes do use over their People. And this he applies to their ambition of prelacy, which prelacy he samples and parallels with the Dominion, Authority, and Lordship, which Heathen Princes exercise over their people. These words of Christ are so express and full, that Bellarmine hath no other Shift to ward off the blow, but to say, that Christ here forbids his Disciples the exercise of all temporal Authority and jurisdiction, such as Heathen Princes used, but not of spiritual Dominion and Lordship, Authority, and jurisdiction over the Church. But it is more clear than the Sun, that Christ forbids here to his Disciples all manner of Dominion and Lordship either over one another, or over the Church of God, as over God's Ministers and People. First, for Lordship over one another, the said Arch-prelate of Canterbury confesseth Christ gave them none. And secondly, for Lordship over God's heritage, the Apostles themselves afterwards both disclaimed in themselves, and condemned in others; as we shall see hereafter. And by the way, by Bellarmine's own confession, all temporal Lordship, or Government is condemned in Prelates.  
But now for our Prelates: Quo jure do they de facto exercise such Authority and Dominion, such Lordship and Jurisdiction over God's Ministers and People, as differeth nothing at all from the State of Heathen Princes? This Christ expressly forbids to his Disciples: and therefore such as do it, are none of his Disciples, nor yet any of their Successors. But they will say, They are spiritual Lords, and exercise a spiritual Lordship over the Church. But this bare Title of spiritual, is too short a cloak to cover the nakedness of so poor a shift. They call themselves spiritual, when they are the most carnal men in the world. Thus did those false 
* 2 Cor. 11. 13.  Apostles, deceitful workers, transform themselves into the Apostles of Christ. Thus Antichrist himself, whom the Scripture entitles 
‡ 2 Thess. 2. 3.  the Man of sin, and the Son of perdition, will salve all, by Styling himself, Holy Father, yea holiness itself. But to come a little more close and home to our Prelates, those spiritual Lords: wherein doth their spiritual Dominion and Lordship differ from that of Heathen Princes? For first, they assume the Title of Prince to themselves, as the Arch-prelate in High Commission most bravely and boldly alleged Psal. 45. 16. for which he borrows Bellarmine's gloss. Prince's then they must be. But what Princes? spiritual. Nay by their lordship's favour, they are temporal Lords; For how else come they to sit in Parliament cheek by jowl with the Princes and Peers of the realm? And do they not in all points bear the Image, and represent Heathen Princes in their State and Dominion? Have they not their Stately Palaces, as they? Have they not their Attendants and Officers of their House, as they? Do they not go in Purple, and Scarlet, silks and Velvets, and fine linen, and fair deliciously every day, as they? Have they not their Courts, and Officers, their tipstaffs, Lictors, and Prisons, as they? And do they not exercise their Authority without subjection to any human Law, and in their own Names, as absolute, and independent Lords, as those Heathen Princes did? Thus have they not with the Beast (their sire) in the 
* Rev. 13. 14.  Revelation, made a perfect Image of the first Beast, to wit, of the Heathen Empire, from top to toe, whose whole form and State of Dominion they set up in their prelatical hierarchy? Doth not the 
‡ ver. 12.  Beast, which cometh out of the earth, having two horns like a Lamb, but speaks as a Dragon (which is the papal hierarchy) exercise all the power of the first Beast before him (namely of the Roman Emperor there described) yea and cause the Earth, with all that dwell therein to worship the first Beast, that is, to subject themselves to the Throne and Authority of the hierarchy, which is now invested with an absolute, imperial, independent power, which yet they blush not to affirm to be jure divino, and from Christ himself? How can any thing be more diametrically contrary to Christ's words here, It shall not be so among you? Yes (saith this shameless Beast, it shall be so with us, and this imperial jurisdiction) we do, and will exercise over the People. As they do indeed.  
Yea these spiritual Lords do not only exercise all the power of the first Beast, as of Heathen Princes over the bodies and goods of men, by imprisoning, fyning, undoing of Men and their whole Families; yea and faggoting also the dear Saints and Servants of God, only by a pretty conveyance, making the Civil Magistrate to be their executioner, as the High Priests having condemned Christ, delivered him over to the Secular Power, to Pilate the Roman governor: but they also usurp and exercise a most transcendent and tyrannical Dominion over the souls and Consciences of God's people, as whose Canons and Constitutions (even their whole Canon Law, written in blood, signified by their red ink, like to Draco his Laws, which for their cruelty were said to be written in blood) are most cruelly pressed upon the people's souls for a full conformity to all those human Rites and Ceremonies of their will-worship in their Divine Service, as they call it. A bondage infinitely more bloody and cruel, then that of God's people of old under the Egyptian Taskmasters. And yet, not withstanding all these things, is this their Lordly and Princely Jurisdiction jure Divino, from Christ? Or are Prelates herein the Apostles Successors? Were the Apostles ever such Princes? Lived they in such Palaces? Kept they such Courts? Did they imprison, persecute, and undo God's Saints? Did they make any Canons, or Laws for will worship? Did they press so much as any one rag of a Ceremony of their own devising upon the Conscience of any of God's people? Nay did they not expressly forbid, and condemn it? Not as Lords over God's Heritage, saith 
* 1 Pet. 5.  Peter to the Presbyters. Not as having dominion over your Faith, saith 
‡ 2 Cor. 1. 24.  Paul to God's Ministers and People. Yea this was also one branch of that Dominion, which the Heathen Emperors exercised over the people, namely to force their Conscienses in matters of Religion. 
‡ Dan. 6. 7.  Darius made a Decree, that none should make any request to God or Man for 30. days, save to the King alone: 
§ Dan. 3.  Nabuchadnezzar proclaims his Commandment, that all should fall down and worship his golden Image. And Julian the Apostata would force the Christians to offer sacrifice to his Idols, or at least to cast but a little incense upon the fire before them. And such as refused, were sorely persecuted, punished, yea put to death. And do not the Prelates exercise the like Dominion over men's souls (I say) even to the utter undoing and exterminating of all those, that refuse to submit their necks to such an Antichristian yoke? Nay do they not fast chain to their Tyranny all Ministers, that take their Oath of canonical obedience, even as temporal Princes take an Oath of Allegiance of their Subjects? Only here is the difference, the Subjects are by their Oath bound to the Prince, to obey him according to God's Law, and the Laws of the Land: but Prelates by imposing the Oath of canonical obedience, do exact of all Ministers absolute and unlimited obedience, to all their Canons, not only those in being (although they be both contrary to Christ's Law, and are not authorised by the Law of the Land) but to whatsoever other Canons they should in time frame and compose. Which was one great coal, that hath caused the smoking out of all the Prelates out of our neighbour country. Thus we see, that the Prelates, exercising the like, yea even the same Authority and Dominion, which the Heathen Princes used in all points over their People, are here flatly and expressly forbidden by Christ himself: So as their prelacy is so far from being sure divino, of divine Authority, as that it is an open rebellion against Christ and his kingdom, and a very trampling of his words under their feet: But it shall not be so among you.  
Again for the words in Luke, The Kings of the Gentiles exercise Lordship over them, and they that exercise Authority upon them, are called Benefactors. But ye shall not be so. Ye shall not be called e'uergétai, Benefactors, or Gracious Lords, as some Translations render it. In which word or Title Christ forbids all such Titles to be assumed by his Apostles, as are Heathenish, or such as did, set forth the magnificence, pomp and State of Heathen Princes, or such Titles, as the Scripture doth not give to God's Ministers. Now it was not unusual with the Heathen to call their Kings, who were the greatest tyrants, and oppressors of the People, 
* Euergétal, Horat.  Benefactors, or the like, in flattery of them. Thus they did incrustare vitia, parget, or rough-cast their vices; as the Poet speaks. And it seems the Pope's learned of the Heathen this fashion of changing of their Names: as, if he were deformed, to call him, Formosus: if cruel, Clemens, &c. But for Prelates, are they not called Euergetae, Benefactors, your Grace, your Honour, Right reverend, most Reverend Father in God, My Lord, My Reverend Discesan, My Patron and Benefactor, Our Metropolitan, Primate, My Ordinary, and many such like devised Titles, nowhere to be found in Scripture, but serving to bolster out their pontificial pride? All such Titles Christ forbids to his Disciples here; as elsewhere also, 
‡ Mat. 23. 8. 9, 10.  Be ye not called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren. And call no man Father upon Earth (such Fathers as Prelates are called) for one is your Father which is in heaven. Neither be ye called Masters: for one it your Master, even Christ.  
But the Prelates will say, Distingue tempora, Distinguish the times: the Apostles were poor, the Church was then but in the infancy, swaddling clouts might serve the turn: but now we that are the Successors of the Apostles, are men grown, and know how to use the honours, pleasures and preferments of the world, being cast upon us; and being now promoted to be Princes, those titles, riches, and honours that we have, are but suitable to our dignity, and serviceable to our Principality: Then was then: and now is now. These things some great Pontificians and Popes themselves have alleged. 
‡ Bernard. De Consider. ad Eugen. 4. lib. 4. c. 2.  But Bernard, who was one of their own, writing to Pope Eugenius, and telling him plainly and freely of all his pontificial Pomp, and how unlike therein he was to Christ and his Apostles: saith, Scilicet sic factitabat Petrus? sic paulus ludebat? Did Peter I pray you do thus? Did Paul play such play? Si auderem dicere, Daemonum magis, quam ovium pascua haec: If I durst speak it, these are the pastrues of Devils, rather than of the Sheep. Honori totum datum datur, Sanctitati nihil aut parum: All is given to honour, but little, or nothing to holiness. But he puts their allegation as I said before) Absit; inquiunt, tempori non convenit: What should holiness do, say they? It is not suitable for our times. Thus Bernard.  
But we need go no further, then to the Painter, whom the Pope set a work in his Gallery to draw the pictures of Peter and Paul: who having painted their faces blushing red, and the Pope coming in to see his work, and asking him, If Peter and Paul had such red faces, because he had so painted them: No, puoth he, but if they were here now, and did behold what a glorious, rich and magnificent Successor they have, they would blush as red, as now you see their pictures do. And his holiness was very well pleased with the painter's Conceit, to see himself a braver man, than ever poor Peter and Paul were, whose Successor notwithstanding he boasts himself to be. For what else, but a Sweet Fable, doth the Pope make of the Gospel, as himself said? And surely we cannot think, that Prelates, who are the limbs of this great Beast, are of any other Spirit, then atheistical, such as the Head himself is of, and which he hath derived to his Members.  
Well, hitherto we have heard Christ's Sentence concerning Prelacy in the Church, and that negatively, denied to his Apostles, as a thing heathenish and carnal; and so which turns Christ's spiritual kingdom into a mere carnal and temporal, yea profane and heathenish kingdom. But it shall not be so among you. Ergo Prelates (as before is noted) are none of Christ's Disciples, and their prelacy, or Hierarchy none of his Institution or Ordinance, but flatly forbidden and condemned by him. Now a word of the affirmative part of his answer, wherein the shows what manner of men his true Disciples must be.  
Verse 27. &c. But whosoever will be great among you, let him be your Minister: and whos'ever will be chief among you, let him be your Servant: The sum is: Christ's Apostles and Disciples must be humble men, and Servants to their brethren, not Lords over them. For these two are opposed one to the other: Prelacy is for proud men: humility for Christ's Disciples. Christ's Disciples then, and Prelates cannot stand together. And pride is not the way to come to sit the next to Christ's right hand, but humility. He that is most humble, shall be exalted to the greatest honour. As Christ saith here, whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your Minister, or Servant. That's the way to be the chief.  
Lastly, in the next words, Christ sets himself for an example: Even as, (saith he) the Son of man came not be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many. And the Servant is not above his Lord. And as Christ humbled himself below all men: So for that cause God hath highly exalted him, 
Phil. 2. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 1.  and given him a Name, above every Name, that in the Name of Jesus every knee should bow, &c. that is as Christ made himself the Servant of all, So God hath made him now the Lord of all: this is that Name above every Name: So as In this Name to bow, is not an hypocritical and Superstitious bowing of the knee of the body, when ever the bare Name Jesus is named, when the Name Christ is nothing regarded: but it is an acknowledgement that Jesus Christ is the Lord and judge of all, to the glory of God the Father; as there the Apostle speaks. So as he there saith, 
* ver. 5.  Let the same mind be in you, which was in Christ Jesus. Thus true humility is the way to honour in Christ's kingdom: he that fits lowest at Christ's footstool here, shall sit highest at his right hand in heaven. So as this is not such an humility, as was in the monk, that always went hanging down his head, until at length he came to be Prior, and then being asked, why now he held up his head: he answered, I have now found the Keys of the Covent. Nor as of another, that being a friar, would cover his Table with a piece of an old Fisher-net, in token of his humility: but coming to be abbot, he cast away his Net; and being asked why, he said, I have now taken the Fish. Neither are Christ's words so to be taken, as the Pope styles himself, Servus Servorum Dei, Servant of the Servants of God: under which Title he hath made himself Dominus Dominantium, Lord of Lords. Nor because Pope Gregory was the first, that styled himself Servus Servorum Dei, and his next Successor but one, Boniface 3. got the Title of Vniversalis Episcopus, universal Bishop: therefore Christ requires such an humility; as aims at temporal promotion. But he is truly humble, that denies himself; and tramples on the world's preferments, preferring Christ's rebukes before the treasures of Egypt, and to suffer afflictions with the people of God, rather than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season. This is that humility, which brings us to that recompense of Reward, to sit at Christ's right hand. And thus much of Christ's words, wherein he declares his mind touching Prelacy, so as he never thought it fittest to govern his Church by Prelates, as the said Archprelate is not ashamed to belie him, and so to blaspheme him. therefore the Hierarchy is no Institution of Christ, and so not jure devino, of divine Authority.   

CHAP. III.  
Wherein sundry passages of the Prelate in his said book, for the mainteynance of his Hierarchy, and so for the disabling of the Authority and Evidence of the Holy Scripture, are met withal.  
FOr concerning the Scripture, he hath writ a large Treatise or 
* Sect. 16.  Section of his Relation, of almost 15 Sheets of paper, wherein he extremely abuses the clearness and sufficiency of Scripture, as wanting light enough of itself to show it to be the word of God; until the Authority and Tradition of the present Church do light it. And for proof hereof he saith, that God in his Providence hath kindled in it no light for that. Thus belying and blaspeming God's Providence. It shall be sufficient to name and note this only, for the present, the confutation thereof requiring a larger discourse, than this of mine will admit. Again, he saith, 
‡ Confer. pag. ●57.  If there be a jealousy or doubt of the Sense of the Scripture, we must repair to the Exposition of the Primitive Church, and submit to that: or call, and submit to a general council, &c. Now, if he shall quarrel this Scripture, and those words of Christ forementioned, as being either jealous or doubtful of the sense thereof: and so send me to the Primitive Church, or call me to a general council, for the determination of this point: what shall we say? For in no case can he yield the Scripture the honour to be sole Judge of controversies in faith. And for the Primitive Church, which he means, namely that which came after Christ and his Apostles, that (he will say) had Bishops, or Prelates. And for a general council, that by his own verdict, must consist of Prelates, and so then shall be Judges in their own cause. Therefore herein I must tell him plainly: that, first, for the Primitive Church, which was that of the Apostles, never any one of them was a Prelate or Diocesan Bishop, as we shall see more anon. Secondly, the next ages of the Church succeeding that of the Apostles, knew no such Lord Bishops, or Prelates, as are now adays, with their trains and Courts. And when they began to get Prelacies, old Jerome reproved them; and so did others. Thirdly, never any general council yet concluded, that Prelates were jure divino. Fourthly, For a general council now to be called for the determining of this controversy, which must consist only of Prelates: I deny them to be competent judges in this Case. For by the Prelates own Confession 
* pag. 157.  No man ought to be both party and judge in his own Cause. And again, the 
‡ pag. 220. 226.  Prelate is too strict and canonical, in tying all men to the decision of a general council, and to yield obedience unto it, yea although it determine a matter erroneous in the Faith. Now than if a general council of Prelates should determine, that Prelates are jure divino, although it be erroneous, yet according to the prelate's Rule, all must yield obedience, and submit thereunto. And then we are gone, if we commit this matter to a general council.  
But we will pass by these, and come to some other of his passages for his Prelacy. He saith, 
‡ pag. 200.  I believe, Christ thought it fitter to govern the Church Aristocratically by Diverse, rather than by one viceroy. And those Diverse, he makes to be Prelates, or hierarches, or rather Archprelates. Now except he verily believe that Prelates are the best men in the world, how can he believe, that Christ thought is fittest to govern his Church by them? For aristocracy is a Government of the best men. Aristoi, Optimi, and therefore called Optimates, most honourable for their virtues But are Prelates so? Doth their extreme pride, ambition covetousness, voluptuousness, idleness, hatred and suppressing of God's word, persecution of God's Ministers, oppression of God's people, even all that profess godliness, and extreme both injustice and cruelty without all Law or Conscience in Censuring poor innocent souls that come before them: do these their virtues make them to be the best men for Christ to think the fittest, by whom to govern his Church? unless in this respect Christ might think it fittest: that seeing he thought it fittest, to keep his true Church, his little flock, always under manifold trials of afflictions and persecutions, as being the exercises of all that will live godly in Christ Jesus, and the way, through which they must go into the kingdom of God: therefore for this very cause, he might think it fittest to suffer Satan to set up Antichrist in the Temple of God, with his train of Prelates, who should prove the most vengeable Instruments of persecuting and oppressing God's true children, of all other men in the world. And this I believe to be true. And again, I believe this to be true also, that Christ thought it fittest to govern his true Church Aristocratically, that is, by the best men, because he hath so expressed himself in his word. Why? Where? and who be those best men? Let my Lord Prelate have patience, and I will show him a clear ground of this my faith, such as he can never show for his blind faith. Those best men, that Christ thought is fittest to govern his Church by: are the several Ministerss rightly qualified, and lawfully placed over their several Congregations respectively. And they are called both Presbyteri, and Episcopi, Presbyters or Elders, and Overseers, or (as Prelates falsely style themselves) Bishops. But how are these oh i aristoi, the best men? Because Christ requires such to have the qualities of the best men. What be those? 
● Tim. 3● 2.  First, such a Bishop, or Overseer must be blameless: the husband of one wife (not therefore one tied from Marriage, which is for Antichrists Priests) vigilant, sober, of good behaviour given to hospitality apt to teach, not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre: but patient, not a brawler, not covetous, &c. And in Titus: 
Tit. 1, 7.  Not selfe-willed: not soon angry: a lover of good men: sober, just, holy, temperate, holding fast the faithful word that he may be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort, and to convince the gainsayers. Such therefore, as call themselves the only Bishops, to exercise Lordship over many Ministers and Congregations, and are proud, heady, high minded, lovers of pleasures, more than lovers of God, cruel strikers with their High-Commission-weapons, soon angry; and never appeased again, not lovers, but persecutors of good men; not such as hold fast the wholesome word, but suppress it all they can, forbidding others to convince the gainsayers, as those of the Arminian party, and the like; and cutting off the ears of those Ministers, that should dare to reprove the Prelates notorious practices and attempts, in setting up a false, Idolatrous, and Anchristian Religion for Christ's Religion, and such like: such (I say) how can the Prelate believe to be of those diverse, whom Christ thought it fittest to govern his Church by.  
again; another passage of his, is this: 
* pag. 210, 21.  She (the Church of England) believes, That our Saviour Christ hath left in his Church, besides his lawbook, the Scripture, visible Magistrates and judges, that is Archbishops, and Bishops, under a gracious King, to govern both for Truth and Peace according to the Scripture, and her own Canons and Constitutions; as also chose of the Catholic Church, which cross not the Scripture, and the just Laws of the realm. So the Prelate.  
In the next passage before, the Prelate makes profession of his own Faith concerning Christ's thought for prelatical Government: and here he tells us what is the Faith of the Church of England about the same new Article of his beliefe. And not unlikely it is, that the prelatical Church of England is of the sane belief with her learned Champion, and great Metropolitan. But the faith both of the Prelate and his Church, in this point, is notoriously erroneous, as both is proved before, and which the Prelates own words here will sufficiently convince of falsehood. For first, Christ left none (when he went into heaven) but his Apostles and Disciples, such as he inspired with his Spirit, to instruct and govern his Church. But the Prelate a 
* lbid..  little after confesseth, that one of these visible judges, Archbishops and Bishops, are infallible. therefore Christ left no such judges; and when he went into heaven, there were no prelates extant, nor yet hatched; and therefore Christ cannot be so much as thought; much less believed, to have left any such visible judges, as the Prelate mentioneth. Secondly, it cannot be safe to believe, that Christ left any such to be visible judges in matters of faith and Religion, who are in their judgement not only erroneous, but in their affections malicious against Christ and his word, and his trile Church. For the universal and constant practice of Prelates (and especially ever since Antichrist hath been exalted in his Throne) in persecuting the Professors of the gospel, doth proclaim them to be of the malignant Church, and of 
‡ Gal. 4. 29.  the bondwoman, that whore of Babylon, whose seed doth persecute the true Church and Children of God: and therefore Christ would never appoint such to be visible judges in matters of Faith and Religion in his Church. Thirdly, the Prelate in making such visible judges besides Christ's lawbook, the Scripture (as he saith) doth hereby deny and exclude the Scripture from being the Sole judge in all matters of Faith and Religion. And the Church of England formerly before this her Metropolitan started up) was of this belief, that the Scripture was the Sole judge and Rule of Faith, and admitted of no other judges to sit on the same Bench with it. This the many learned works of our English Divines, yet extant, can abundantly testify. Therefore except the Church of England hath lost her wits, and hath no more grace left her, than the grace and faith of Canterbury: she cannot be so mad as to believe Christ left any such visible judges, as her Prelate speaks of. Fourthly, it can never be believed of any sensible man, much less of any even common Christian, that Christ would leave notorious hypocrites to be judges in matters of Religion, who under a fair pretence of Truth and Peace, do labour utterly to destroy both Truth and Peace in his Church. As here, the Prelate names Truth and Peace, as the end of his hierarchical Government: but his practices do prove him to be the greatest enemy both of Truth and Peace, that ever sat in the chair of Canterbury. For first, for Truth (as the Truth of the Doctrines of Grace, laid down in the Articles of Religion of the Church of England hath he not in the declaration before those 39 Articles (but set forth in the King's Name: for all must be, under a gracious King) baffled it, making the Articles to speak nonsense, or in the language of the Delphic Oracle, ambiguous, that may be taken either way, as favouring the Arminian, as well as the Orthodox; so as by this means, his Arminian Crew may prove their Heresies out of those Articles, as well as the Orthodox, can the Truth. Is this visible judge then for Truth? again, how doth he suppress all preaching of the Doctrines of Grace, by terrifying Ministers in all the Visitations of these visible judges? So clear it is, that he governs for Truth.  
Secondly, for Peace. What Peace, I pray you, hath either the Church, or State of England had, since this Polypragmatick began to stir and stickle both in Church and State? Nay what Peace hath the neighbour-kingdom had, since his arm hath been imped out, to put his hot coal under the Eaves of that Church also. So as now, when Scotland burneth, is't not time for England to look out, and to cast on water, and to quench the fire, not with more fire, to consume all, but by quenching the coal, that both first kindled, and still fomenteth the flame? Thus we see what a governor here is under a gracious King, For Truth and Peace. But, fiftly, he addeth, According to the Scripture. This is something. And yet as good as nothing: for he immediately annexeth, And her own Canons and Constitutions Canons, enough to batter the Scripture: and Constitutions to undermine and blow it up. For what Scripture can stand in any force, where his Canons come? And much more, where these Canons of his Church of England are seconded by his Catholic Church: Wherein his Church of England, and that of Rome, are become (according to his 
* Confe. Epist. Dedicatory, & pag. 376.  own words) one and the Same Church, of one and the Same Faith and Religion. And thus indeed, the Church of England may enter Common with Rome in her Canons, as namely in her Canon Law, and so make Corpus Cononicum the Rule whereby to govern this new Corporation of the Two Churches now become one again. So as let but the Canons of the Church of England be seconded with those of her Prelates Catholic Church, and then all Scripture is gone in Common Law. So vain is it, that with Scripture he names and yokes his Canons of England and Rome, by which his Figures of value, he conjures the Scripture within the circle of a mere cipher But, Sixtly, he concludes with this qualification: which cross not the Scripture, and the just Laws of the realm. But first, for the Scripture, who shall be Judge whether the Canons do cross it? Who but the Canon-makers, and Canon-masters, the Prelates? And will they trow you turn the mouth of their own Canons against themselves? Nay their Canons, though never so cross to Scripture, yet are like to Darius his Decree, which though against the Scripture, yet rather than it shall be broken, Daniel must to the lion's den, to try whether the Lions, or the King's Decree be more cruel. So the prelate's Church Catholic Canons are like the Laws of the Medes and Persians, all the Daniels in the world shall rather to the lion's den, than the Canons be reversed. To give but one instance for many: That Canon De Haeretibus comburendis, Of Burning the heretics (which is one of those special Canons of his Catholic Church, and a most damnable Canon, as any in all the pack, and such, as if Christ and his Apostles were now upon the earth, and did Preach as once they did, they should by virtue of that Canon be brought to the Stake, as Christ was by the High priest's 
* Ioh. 19 ●  Law to his cross) that Canon (I say) though it cross the Scripture (as being against all true christians, whom this Canon calls heretics, and burns for the Scripture-sake) yet shall it not be for ever in force, so long as there is one heretic remaining upon the face of the earth, and one Pope, or Prelate to discharge the Canon?  
But the Prelate adds, And the just Laws of the realm: If the said Canons cross not the just Laws of the realm. This is as good, as the former, and no better. For what Laws of the realm doth he account just? Those, that cross any prelatical practices, and Antichristian lawless courses of his spiritual Courts? Surely those are not to be ranked among the just Laws of the realm those must needs be unjust Laws, which are made to restrain; the insolency and lawless proceedings of prelatical Courts. Which is the reason, that now of late, under this Archprelate, Prohibitions out of the King's bench to the High-Commission are so gueason, so well Schooled are both Lawyers to move, and Judges to grant any such thing. Thus the Prelates practices are a sufficient Commentary of his own words. So as the sum of this his whole passage is, That his Church of England must submit her belief to her Arch Bishops and Bishops, as visible judges left by Christ to govern, and to determine all matters of difference in point of Faith and Religion, and that according to Scripture too, so far as they cross not her own Canons, and those of the Catholic Church, wherein England and Rome are one and the Same, one Church, of one Faith, of one Religion. And all this (if we may believe her Metropolitan) the Church of England believes. O miserable Church!   

CHAP. iv.  
Wherein some other Passages of the Prelate in his book, touching the Authority of his hierarchy, are met withal, and confuted by evidence of Scripture.  
IN his 
* pag 15.  Epistle Dedicatory he hath these words: She the Church of England) practises Church-Government, as it hath been in use in all Ages, and all Places, where the Church of Christ hath taken any rooting, both in, and ever since the Apostles times; and yet the Separatist condemns her for Antichristianism in her Discipline. So he. A bold Speech, and the more bold, because most false, and hath nothing but his bare Ipse dixit, his naked affirmation, as Authority sufficient. Whence I note sundry particulars. First that he calleth the hierarchy, or ecclesiastical Government thereof, the Church of England. A thing familiar with Prelates to make themselves the Church. And such a Church as that of Rome, the Pope and his Priests, or Prelates, are the Church, as themselves affirm. Whereas indeed (as Junius hath well distinguished) ● they are not the Body itself of the Church, but wens, or swellings grown up, and so incorporated into the Body, as overspreading it like a leprosy, it assumes the denomination of the Body. And such are Prelates, who in the Church of England are Strumae great swellings like the King's evil, which are commonly next the Head, or about the neck, in the most principal parts of the Body. Only in this they will not be called the King's evil, because they claim their original from Christ (as before is noted) and therefore though they be but certain Abscessus, or Apostemes (and so indeed Apostates from the true Church of Christ) which not only deform the Body, but greatly in danger the life thereof, yet the name of Church they challenge in peculiar to themselves. But surely the true Church of Christ in England disclaims communion with such a false Church, as the hierarchy calls itself.  
Secondly, he saith that his Church, or prelatical Government hath been in all Times and Places, where the Church of Christ hath taken any rooting. Here he finely excludes all the Protestant Reformed Churches, as no Churches of Christ, because they have weeded out those. 
* Heb. 12. 15.  bittet roots, whereby many are defiled, and rooted up those plants, 
‡ Mat. 15. 13.  which our heavenly Father hath not planted, to wit; all Prelates with their hierarchical Government, which being rooted out of those Churches, the gospel (blessed be God) and so the true Church of Christ hath taken the deeper and firmer rooting, and brought forth the more abundant 
‡ Rom. ●●●.  fruits of holiness. But the Prelate in thus unchurching all true Reformists, is as good as his word, which he openly spoke at Dr. Bastwick's Censure, in High-Commission, saying, The Protestant Churches beyond the Seas were no Churches, as having no Bishops, calling Calvin a plain rascal. But so long as those Churches have the true Bishops namely Orthodox and Sound Pastors to feed their several Flocks, it is not the Arch-prelate, that can so easily degrade them from being Christ's true Churches, as he can deprive those Ministers both of Ministry and means, who are obnoxious to his Church-Government.  
Thirdly, where he saith, that his Church-Government hath been in use in all Ages, and in all Places, where the Church of Christ hath taken any rooting, both In, and ever since the Apostles times: although this be most false, yet were it true, it would not thereupon follow, that this his Church-Government is either apostolical, or jure divino, or from Christ. For first, every thing that hath been in use in the Apostles times, and in the true Church of Christ, is not therefore Apostolic, or such, as the true Church of Christ alloweth of. For we read, that the mystery of Iniquity began to work in the Apostles times, and even then there were 
§ 2 Thess. 2.  many Antichrists, and that in the very midst of the Church in those days. 
† 1 John 2.  And if Prelates shall prove to be those Antichrists, which the Apostles detected, and described by their qualities (as will appear anon) then because such Antichrists were extant, and their Church-Government in use in the Apostles times, will the Prelate therefore conclude, such were Apostolic, and had their original jure divino? Secondly, neither can the Prelate ever prove, that his prelatical Government (as now of later, and of long time it hath been) is any thing like to the Church-Government exercised by those, who took upon them to be the first Diocesan, or provincial Bishops in those ages succeeding the Apostles. He that shall read the Centuries; Catolagus Testium veritatis, and other true Church Stories, shall find as vast a difference between those poor ancient Bishops, both in their manner of life, and Church-Government, and the modern Prelotes, since Antichrist mounted aloft in his Pontificalibus: as the 
* Ovid. Meta.  Poet makes between the Silver Age, and the Iron Age: or as the 
‡ Dan. 2.  Prophet shows between the brazen breast of the Image of the Babylonish Empire, and the feet mixed of iron and clay. And that Image may well resemble the State of the spiritual Babylon, or Hierarchy, which had its rise of simple and small beginnings, but by degrees Successively, it grew and got strength, and both height and breadth, and so became at length of a blind Brooke, a goodly navigable River, so as the Church turned a City of traffic and Trade in all worldly pleasures and riches (as Babylon is described Revel. 18.) and so the more worldly it grew, the more wicked, proud, tyrannical, lordly, and imperious, and of a Militant Church turned Triumphant as the Prelate himself saith of Rome so as now the Church Government of the Prelates in regard of their great Courts, and Consistories, and doing all things without the Presbytery; is as much unlike that ancient Church-Government of those Bishops of old, as our modern Prelates themselves are unlike them in manner of life; for these are persecutors of the Gospel: those were persecuted, and suffered martyrdom for Christ. Thus it is false, that he saith, that the Church-Government now in England was in use in the Primitive Church. For to instance in one thing: In those ancient time's Excommunication was not used for every trifle, nor done in a blind Court, nor denounced by a dumb Priest. But enough of this.  
Fourthly, whereas he saith: And yet the Separatist condemns her for Antichristianism in her Discipline. First, as for the Separatist (as he calls him) I think the Prelate with this his Book, and other his prelatical practices hath made more Separatists from his prelatical Church of England, then ever any that hath sit in the chair of Canterbury ever since his Predecessor Augustine first sat in it. Nor do I see, how any Christian living in England can with a safe Conscience have communion with that Church, which professeth (as the Prelate doth in her Name) to be one and the Same Church with Rome, of one and the Same Faith and Religion. Yea were it no more, but that the Church of England professeth to be a hierarchical or prelatical Church, which in that very respect is no true Church of Christ, it were argument and cause sufficient to separate from her. And that because,  
Secondly, he that is a true Separatist from her, for the former respects, may justly condemn her for Antichristianism in her Discipline, For first, She exerciseth, She professeth no other Discipline, but that which Antichrist, the Pope and the whole Antichristian Romish Church exerciseth and professeth, and that in all points Cap a pied, from top to toe. And this her Discipline is Antichristian, as being of Antichrist, and so against Christ, and exercised in the maintenance of Antichrist. For instance: The prelatical Church of England hath lately found out a Discipline, to censure, punish, imprison, fine, excommunicate, degrade deprive, and all these together, him that shall dare to deny the Pope and Prelates to be jure divino. Dr. Bastwick did thus: and so the High-Commission served him, as aforesaid. What Discipline then in the world can be more Antichirstian, or more forcible to drive Christians from having any more communion with that Church; which exercising such an Antichristian Discipline, how can She shift off the just condemnation of Antichristianism, which they shall cast upon her? Again, Secondly, the whole Discipline of the Church of England, as it is the Discipline, which Antichrist and his Church exerciseth, and therefore Antichristian: So it is that, which hath no footing, but is expressly forbidden in the word of God, as Antichristian and tyrannical. For the Church of England's Discipline stands most upon the imposition of sundry Ceremonies of human invention, and Antichristian observation, which She presseth upon all men's Consciences, and for default of Conformity, lays grievous Censures upon them, as Excommunication, and the like. Now all such Ceremonies, so imposed, both Christ himself condemneth, 
* Mat. 15. 9  In vain they worship me, teaching for Doctrines the commandments of men: and the Apostle also throughout that whole Chapter of the Epistle to the Collossians doth charge Christians not to put their necks under any such yoke, as whereby they are deprived of the benefit of Christ's death, and beguiled of their reward, and spoiled of their Christian liberty, and the like. Again, the Prelates in imposing their Ceremonies are Antichristian, because in so doing, they usurp Christ's throne, and therein fitting, do exercise a Tyranny over men's Consciences, intolerable to be borne; which if men will not yield unto, they do in as much as in them lieth, make them anathemas, shut them out of the Church, by Excommunication, &c. And lastly, their Excommunication, not only in regard of the matter and cause, for which it is, namely, because men will not renounce Christ's service, to take the tyrannical yoke of Antichrists Ceremonies upon the shoulders of their Consciences, but for the very manner of it, as it is used in the Church of England, is a Discipline Antichristian, as being against that form of Excommunication, which is prescribed in the word of God, and was practised in the apostolical Churches. It was Christ's rule, Tell it to the Church, that is, to the Congregation; and if the Offender will not hear the Congregation, he is Excommunicate by and out of the Congregation. And the Apostles rule is, for such Offenders as deserve Excommunication: 
* 1 Cor. 5. 3, 4, 5.  I verily (saith he) as absent in body, but present in Spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him, that hath so done this deed: In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my Spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such a one unto Satan, for the destruction of the flesh, that the Spirit may be saved in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. Whence I note, that Excommunication is a solemn business, not to be inflicted for every trifling matter, much less as the Pharisees did, who excommunicated all those, that confessed Christ; nor to be done in a blind Court, and by a single soled Priest, nor the Offender to be released for the payment of his fees, or by way of committing, or the like: all which are practised in the Discipline of the Church of England. But Excommunication must not be, but for a great offence; nor done, but by the whole Congregation, nor released, but upon the public repentance, confession, and promise of reformation before the said Congregation, where the offence was given, and by whom the penalty is taken off. Therefore the Discipline of the Church of England in this case is wholly Antichristian.  
Lastly, forasmuch as Prelates do necessarily draw after them a train of Ceremonies, as a chain of so many links, wherewith they captivate, ensnare, and enslave the Consciences of men (as their Motto is, No ceremony, no Bishop: for they go inseparably together, like Toby, and his dog) and the Church of England in her Discipline, and Church-Service, is wholly captivated by the Masters of such Ceremonies, the Prelates: and some Ceremonies are such, as even do deny the Lord that bought them, as namely, Altars, and their Service: and all the Ceremonies imposed upon the Conscience, deny Christ to be the only King of his Church: all these taken together, what between the Prelates, and between their Ceremonies, the Church of England, and her Discipline is become Antichristian; and therefore no marvel, if for this cause, good Christians, that have knowledge, and make Conscience, do separate from communion with any such Church.   

CHAP. V.  
Wherein some other Passages of the Prelate are taken tripping, though he would run away with it, That his hierarchy is Jure Divino.  
HE saith, 
* Confer, pag. 175, 176.  For the Calling and Authority of Bishops over the inferior clergy, that was a thing of known use, and benefit for preservation of unity and Peace in the Church. And so much St. Jerome tells us. Though being none himself, he was no great friend to Bishops. And this was so settled in the minds of men from the very Infancy of the Christian Church, as that it had not been to that time contradicted by any. So that then there was no controversy about the Calling. The difficulty, was to accommodate their Precedencies; And the 
‡ pag. 183.  Ordine Primus (whereof there was a necessity) falling to the Roman Prelate, by reason of the imperial Seat, this was the very fountain of papal greatness, the Pope having his Residence in the imperial City. So he.  
Now for answer hereunto: First, for the Authority of Bishops or prelates over the inferior clergy (as he calls it) first he must prove their Calling, before he can make good their Authority. Now Prelates have no such Calling from God. And the Apostle saith, 
‡ Heb. 5. 4, 5.  No man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God as Aaron. So Christ glorified not himself, to be made an High Priest: but he that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to day have I begotten thee: Thou art a Priest for ever after the Order of Melchisedec. But that the Prelates have no such Calling from God, the Prelate himself (as before is noted) doth as good as confess, saying, 
§ Confer. pag. 177.  Among Bishops there was effectual Subjection respectively grounded upon Canon, and Posuive Law in their several Quarters Ergo this was not jure divino. And if not, where is their Authority then? And therefore, as the Prelate saith of the Pope's Supremacy, in being the Sole Living judge in and over the universal Church. 
† pag. 198, 199.  Neither (saith he) hath he power from Christ over the whole Church to do it; nay out of all doubt, 'tis not the least Reason, why De Facto he hath so little success, because De Jure he hath no Power given: So I may say as truly of all Prelates (who challenge to be the living visible judges (as before is showed) which is one main part of their usurped Authority over the Ministry) that they have no such Power from Christ over their several Diocese, Provinces, or Quarters to do it; nay out of all doubt 'tis not the least Reason, why De Facto they have so little success, because De Jure they have no Power given. According to that in the Prophet. 
* ler. 23. 30, 31, 32.  Behold (saith the Lord) I am against the Prophets, that steal my word every one from his Neighbour. Behold I am against the Prophets, saith the Lord, that use their tongues, and say, He Saith. Behold I am against them that prophesy false dreams, saith the Lord, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their lightness, yet I sent them not, nor commanded them therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord. And this: is the very case of the Prelates; they are faise Prophets, they steal God's word from the people of God, and instead thereof use their own word, prophesying false dreams, saying, The Lord saith, the Lord hath sent us, we have our Calling and Authority from God over all Ministers, we are the sole living visible judges in matters of Faith and Religion, so as all must rest in our judgement, according to our own Canons and Constitutions, &c. thus causing simple people to err by their lies, and by their lightness: yet the Lord hath not sent them, nor commanded them, they have no Calling, and so no Power and Authority from God: and therefore the Lord is against these false Prophets: and because he hath not commanded them, nor sent them, therefore they shall not profit the people at all.  
But Secondly, the Prelate saith, that his prelatical jurisdiction over the inferior clergy, was a thing of known use and benefit for preservation of unity and Peace in the Church. Now first, for his inferior clergy. Clergy being appropriated to the Ministry is an abusive Monopoly, and usurpation; for all God's people redeemed by Christ, are his kleroes, his Lot, or inheritance, whereof the word clergy is derived. As Peter saith, writing to the Presbyters, 
‡ 1 Pet. 5.  Not as Lording over ton kleron, God's heritage, but as ensamples to the flock. So that the flock of God, are his kleroes, his heritage. But to pass over this: Secondly, he tells us of an inferior clergy: he means his Priests, and the rest, as Archdeacons, and so forth, to the number of 7 Orders, as they call them. A rabble of Orders not unsuitable to the Subjects of a Lord Prelate, as being all of them of human device and institution; of which their hierarchy is made up; another word of man's invention, which some call rather 
‡ Hist. Concil. Trid.  Hierodoulia; but what holy Orders Christ hath left in his Church, we shall see anon. Thirdly, this was (saith he) a thing of known use and benefit. Of the known use we have formerly spoken. But now, what's the benefit? Namely, for the preservation of unity and peace in the Church. How proves he this? From S. Jerome, who said, That one was chosen over the rest in Sckismatis remedium, to remedy schism in the Church. But by the way, these very words of Jerome do argue, that Prelates were of human Institution: for unus electus est, one was chosen, Ergo of men. But lerome speaks more expressly, which the Prelate wisely passeth over dry foot, where he saith, that Prelacy was set up humana praesumptione, non Institutione Divina, by human Presumption, and not by Divine Institution. Well: but had it that success, the Prelate speaks of? Did it produce the fruitful benefit of unity and Peace? Or what unity? Or what peace? Indeed we find by woeful proof, that this Hierarchy was the very egg, of which the Cockatrice, Antichrist was hatched, so as the Hierarchy consisting of so many Prelates, grew at length coalescere, to grow together into one Antichristian body, whereof the Ordine Primus came to be the head. And herein unity and Peace are so conjoined, as they have made up one entire new Catholic Church, that, whereof the Prelate professeth himself, with the Church of England, and of Rome, and all other prelatical Churches in the world, (all other not prelatical, as the Reformed Protestants beyond the Seas, excluded, as before is noted) to be, in all which this his Catholic Church (as 
* Confer. pag. 370.  elsewhere he saith, hath its existence. Which prelatical Catholic Church is the very head and body of Antichrist. Even as the Prelate tells us, that the Ordine Primus, the Roman Prelate having his Throne in Rome. This (saith he) was the very fountain of papal greatness: So I may say, The prelacy, or hierarchy was the very fountain, whence hath issued the main Ocean of those 
‡ Revel. 17. 15.  many waters over which the Whore sitteth, which though it be distinguished into many several Seas of so many Prelates, yes all make up but one main Sea (as it were) one Catholic Church. And this is that unity and Peace, the benefit of both the constitution, and preservation whereof is to be ascribed to the Hierarchy of Prelates over their inferior Clergy.  
Thirdly where he saith, Though S. Jerome, being no Prelate himself, he was no great friend to Bishops. Hence I note only the conceit of the Prelate, that he thinks none can speak against Prelates, but such as are none themselves, as if it were only a matter of envy. But as the Poet said, Dic mibi, si fias tu Leo, qualis eris? Tell me, if thou thyself wert a Lion, what manner of man wouldst thou be? So the Prelate imagines, that if any of those, that speak against the Authority of Prelates, were themselves Lions that is, Lord Prelates, they would be of another mind, they would then say, We Prelates have Authority over all inferior Priests, Jure Divino; we are the Sole visible living judges to determine and resolve all doubts in matters of Faith and Religion; we are the Sole Masters of Ceremonies, to bind all men to canonical obedience to all our Canons and Constitutions: we enjoy honours, pleasures, riches, ease, delights of the world, favours in Court, and what not? Thus the Prelate thinks all men would be of his mind, were they in his Place. And I think so too, thus far, that they who take upon them the Prelacy, they no sooner sit in that chair, but it proves a chair of Pestilence unto them, infecting and corrupting man's very reason and judgement so far, as to make him believe all is gold that glistereth. Only few come to that chair, but such as are self-infected with their own inbred Plagues, as pride, Ambition, covetousness, and that in a high Degree. So as King James being once asked, why he had made so many Bishops, in Scotland, and not one honest man amongst them all: he replied, saying, By his Saul there was never an Honest Man wad tack a bishopric. And Histories tell us of many holy men, that utterly refused bishoprics, And there is never a true Reformed Protestant Minister, 
Vid Espencaeum in Tim.  but hates a bishopric, as he doth the Throne of the Beast. But  
Fourthly (saith the Prelate) This (to wit authority of Bishops) was so settled in the minds of men from the very Infancy of the Christian Church, as that it had not been to that time (in the 4th Age or Century) contradicted by any. No doubt but such a brave and bonny thing, as a Prelacy; would find Grace enough in the world, and quickly sink down, and settle in men's minds and affections. But what's this to the purpose, as to prove it a Calling from God? But this was (saith he) from the very Infancy of the Christian Church. Surely the Prelacy, in the very Infancy of the Christian Church, either had no being at all in rerum natura, or was but a misshapen embryo, or infant in the mother's belly, as Esau was at the same time in his mother's belly with Jacob, yea and would have claimed the blessing of the birthright too from Jacob, because of his antiquity. And did not this young Babe wrestle with Jacob in the womb, when the Apostle saith, The Mystery of iniquity doth already works, and this young Prelate wanted but time and opportunity to grow up to be a 
‡ Gen. 10. 8, 9  Nimrod, even the great Antichrist, as we shall see further anon. So as to plead Antiquity of the Prelacy even from the very Infancy of the Christian Church, is yet no good Argument to confirm their Authority to be jure divino. For even Satan's kingdom had existence in the world, before Christ was Promised. And the kingdom of heaven, to wit of grace here, is described to be such as no sooner was the wheat of the gospel sown, but that wicked one had his Supersemination of Tares of manifold errors, such as sprung up even in the Apostles times, the very Infancy of the Church. But had not been till that time which the Prelate speaks of) contradicted by any. That I must now contradict. For first (as before is showed) Christ forbade it upon the first motion of it. Secondly, the Apostles of which we shall speak by and by) mightily contradicted it, and cried it down, as being that monstrous mystery of Iniquity. And thirdly, it was contradicted by sundry; as by Aerius. But you will presently say, that Epiphanius ranks him (even for that very opinion only, that he held Prelates not to be de jure divino, or that the Degree of a Bishop was no greater, then that of a Priest) in the Catalogue of heretics. And so am I also content, upon the same terms, to be by the Prelates, counted for an heretic. But Secondly, himself confesseth S. Jerome to have contradicted their Authority; as we noted before; saying, that their Institution was merely of human Presumption. Yea and thirdly Augustine (that Famous light) was of the same mind with Jerome: So as some of the Learned in the 
* Hist. Concil. Trid.  council of Trent alleged both of them in this point. So that contradicted it was, and had been, and that by many, and some of them (as Christ and his Apostles) of Divine and Infallible Authority. So as without all controversy, prelatical Authority over other Ministers is no Calling of God at all; which we now come more fully to show, by the Testimony of the Apostles, both in their Doctrine and practice.   

CHAP. VI.  
Wherein is showed, that according to the Scripture, Preshyters and Bishops are all one, without difference, so as he which is a Presbyter, is called Episcopus, a Bishop, and a Bishop a Presbyter.  
THe first place of Scripture that proves this, is in Acts 20. where the Apostles called together the Presbyters, or Elders of the Church of Ephesus, as ver. 17. which Elders, or Presbyters in v. 28. he calls Episcopus, saying, Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you Episcopous, (that is, Overseers, as our English renders the word, or) Bishops, to feed the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. From which words it is manifest, First, that Presbyters and Bishops are all one and the same Order, Calling and Office. Secondly, that in the Church of Ephesus there were many Bishops, or Presbyters. Thirdly, that they had their Calling from the Holy Ghost. Fourthly, that their Office was to feed the Flock of God, over the which the Holy Ghost had made them Overseers. And for this Cause such are called elsewhere 
* Eph. 4. 11.  Pastors, and Teachers, right shepherds indeed, that feed the flock of God. Now will our Prelates say, First, that they are those Episcopi? What more contrary to their Canons, and practise: For First, they do not allow, that every Presbyter be called a Bishop, nor to be of the same Order, Calling, and Office. For they say, that the Order, Calling, and Office of a Bishop or Prelate is distinct and different from that of the Presbytery. Secondly, the Prelates have an old Canon, that there must be but one Bishop in one City, or Diocese. But here we see the Church of Ephesus, that one City had many Bishops in it, even as many as there were Presbyters. Thirdly, our Prelates can never prove their Authority and Office to be from the Holy Ghost either from any inward calling, or outward. Not from an inward calling, because, first, it is not any zeal of God's glory, or desire to win souls to God, but it is the strong bias of ambition and covetousness, pride, and vain glory, and love of the world, that draws them to a bishopric. Nor Secondly, is it an outward calling from men. For as in respect of God, they have run; afore they be sent: So in respect of Man, they come before they be called. Yea they provide and prepare a long time before for such a Purchase. For they heap up by hook or crock 3 or 4 Fat Livings, they seldom Preach at any of them, nor keep Residence, or Hospitality, but hoard up full bags, skulk at the Court, ingratiate themselves with those in greatest Grace, and when the chair is void, they bring out their bags, and so they are the only qualified men for such a Dignity. They are well known to be no Puritans. So as neither according to their own ancient Canons (which were framed according to the practice held in the Apostles days, when the People had a voice in the election of their Pastors) have the Prelates an outward calling to their dignities. For instance; when Mr. Moutague was to be installed (or I wot not what they call it) in Bow Church, and the tipstaff (according to the Ancient custom in that Case) with his Mace proclaims open liberty for any, that can come and except against the worthiness of that Man; one stood forth, and made his exception; which though it was both legal, and very material, yet he was borne down, and the matter never came to trial, but was carried with a strong hand for the new Prelate. Thus (I say) they have no lawful, nor truly formal, or yet canonical outward Calling. Yea, besides that they are notorious Simonists, either purchasing that dignity with a great sum of money, or procuring it, obsequio, by obsequiousness, or Court-Service, and attendance, or by a wager, or the like (all which are branches of simony they do also play the egregious hypocrites. For when the Question is asked them, Vis Episcopare, Wilt thou be a Bishop? he answers, Nolo, No forsooth. And this is done three times. A mere mock-holiday. For if the wretch were taken at his word, he were undone. Fourthly, neither do our Prelates affect the bishopric for that end, that those Bishops of the Church of Ephesus were exhorted unto by the Apostle: namely, to feed the Fock of God. Yea, besides that their aim and desire is not for the Office and work of a true Bishop (as the Apostle saith, 
* 1 Tim. 3. 1.  He that desireth the Office of a Bishop, desireth a worthy work) which is principally to feed the flock of God, as also 
‡ 1. Pet. 5. 2.  Peter exhorteth; for they look not to the duty, but after the dignity, as Chrysostom and 
‡ Vides omnem Ecclesiasticum zelum fervere, sola pro dignitate tuenda. Ber.  Bernard have noted of old. Thou seest (saith Bernard) all ecclesiastical zeal to boil and pant after their Dignities only, &c. as we noted before: besides this, I say, it is a thing impossible for them to feed the flock of God. For some of them have four or five hundred Flocks within their Diocese, some more some less, which they never once in all their life bestow one fothering upon; only the Prelate in his triennial Visitation, that is once in 3. years, visits perhaps half a dozen Churches, where he comes not to feed the flock with one Scrap of a Sermon, but to fill his pouch with his poor Ministers double Procurations, and his paunch with their good cheer. But our Prelates will answer (as our Non-residents do in that case) that though themselves do not feed the flock, yet their Curates do it for them. For (say our Prelates, and that according to their Collect for Bishops and Curates) all the Ministers in their several Diocese are their Curates, to feed so many Flocks. Thus by this reckoning, the Prelates are the most egregious Non-residents, of all other. And thus we see, how not only unlike, but directly contrary all Prelates are to those Bishops of the Church of Ephesus, and that in all and every of those particular and remarkable respects forespecified out of the Apostles own words. And therefore by that place of Scripture, Prelates, though they have usurped most unjustly the Title of Bishops, yet they have nothing in them of true Bishops indeed, and therefore are never able to prove, that they are Bishops jure divino. For they which are Bishops jure divino, are lawful Pastors set over their particular flock, to feed the same with the wholesome food of the word: but Prelates call themselves Diocesan Bishops, having so many Flocks, as they neither do, nor ever are able, nor ever intend to feed them. Nay instead of feeding them, they restrain and inhibit all Ministers to feed their flock at all in the afternoon on the Lord's days, nor at any time to feed them with sound and wholesome, and comfortable food of the Doctrines of Grace, and God's free love to his Elect in giving Christ for them, effectually to redeem them, and certainly to bring them to that eternal glory in heaven, which God from all Eternity had Predestinated them unto. So as without this sound preaching of Grace no Flock can be Savingly fed. Prelates therefore are Wolves to destroy, not shepherds to feed the flock of Christ.  
A Second place of Scripture, proving a Presbyter and a Bishop to be all one, in Order, Calling and Office, is in Tit. 1. 5. &c. For this Cause (saith the Apostle to Titus) I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain Elders in every City, as I had appointed thee. If any be blameless, &c. For a Bishop must be blameless, as the Steward of God; not self-willed &c. Here again we plainly see, that those, who are the Presbyters, or Pastors set over the Flock of God, are here called Bishops by the Apostle. Whence in is evident that in the Infancy of the Christian Church, in the time of the Apostles themselves, and that by Order from Christ, and from the Holy Ghost, all Presbyters, or true Pastors of severall Congregations (as aforesaid) were called Bishops, or Overseers, as the Greek word signifieth. And this was kata polin, in every City, and town in Crete, especially where there was a Congregation of Christians, Titus was appointed by the Apostle to ordain such Elders or Bishops, And in Centuries we read, how in some Countries, there was never a town, or Village, but it had a Bishop in it, which Bishop was the Pastor there. And the several qualities required in those Presbyters or Bishops are in the same Chapter set down by the Apostle, which because we touched before upon occasion, I will not here insist upon. But those qualities are such, as our Prelates willingly leave to those poor Presbyters or Bishops, as most suitable for those Apostolic Times and Persons, Content they are to take the Name of Bishop upon them, but for the qualities there required, they are not prelatical enough, such as will suit with a Lord-Bishop. For those were poor Bishops, or Overseers, and Feeders of one flock in this or that City: but these are Lord-bishops over a whole Diocese, as before is noted.  
To these places, we might add others; as Phil. 1. 1. With the Bishops and Deacons. Where the Apostle, naming no more Orders, but of Bishops and Deacons (the same which he nameth and describeth in the forecited places, 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1.) makes it clear unto us, that by those Bishop's in Philippi he means the same in kind, that were in Ephesus, and Crete, to wit, so many Presbyters, as were also called Bishops, or Overseers. And naming Bishops. which were at Philippi, it argues, there were many Bishops of that one Church, as we noted before of the Church of Ephesus. And in other places also, they are called Elders. For 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule will, be counted worthy of double honour, málista o'i kopiontes, especially those, that take greatest pains in the Word and Doctrine. 
1 Tim. 3. ●.  Now those Elders (Chap. 3.) he calls Bishops. Implying they are both one, as also, that there were many of those Bishops in the Church of Ephesus, where Timethy then was. And those Presbyters or Bishops, some were more industrious in the word and Doctrine, did kopian, labour more hard therein (as the word signifieth) then ordinary: and therefore such the Apostle would have to be counted worthy of double honour. Now is it thus with our Lord-Bishops? First, do they kopian, toil hard at God's Plough (to use Latimer's Comparison) do they desire no more honour, but such as is proportionable to their pains in Preaching God's word? Tussi, their honour is according to the honour of the City whereof they are Lord-Bishops (as the Prelate himself 
‡ Confer. pag. 176.  tells us, The Honours of the Church should follow the Honours of the State) or according to the greatness of their revenues, or according to their great favour and place in King's Courts, and not according to their years, or virtues, or good deserts, which are neither required in them, nor respected of them. Thus still all along quantum abludunt, how much distance is there, and what infinite disparity between our Lord Bishops, and Scripture-bishops? And lastly, these Bishops, so called by Paul, are called also by Peter Praesbyteri, Presbyters, or Elders: where he saith, 
‡ 1 Pet. 1, 2, 3, 4.  The Elders which are among you, I exhort, who am also an Elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God, which is among you, taking the oversight thereof (Episcopountes) not by constraint, but willingly: not for filthy luore, but of a ready mind: neither as being Lords over God's Heritage, but being Ensamples to the flock. And when the chief shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a Crown that fadeth not away. Where First, he notes the Ministers and Pastors by the Title of Presbyters, or Elders, as also he styles himself. He saith not My Lords, or Right Reverend Fathers, or the like. Secondly, he useth no imperious language unto them, but saith, parakalo, I exhort, or beseech you. Not as the Prelates to their Priests. These are to will and require you, upon pain of episcopal Censure, &c. Thirdly, the thing he exhorts them unto, is to feed the flock of God committed to their Charge. But our Lord-Prelates command their inferior Ministers to feed their flock, as sparingly as may be, as, at the most to preach but once upon the Lord's day, or once a month will serve, and for Catechising in the afternoon, altogether to forbear expounding, and for the sound food of the doctrines of God's free Grace, which is the very sum of the Gospel, never to preach of them at all, as being too puritanical, and the like. Fourthly, He exhorts them to feed, each his own flock, Feed the flock of God, which dependeth on you. He saith not Flocks, as if one Presbyter or Bishop were set over many Flocks or Congregations as our Lord Bishops are; as is noted before. Fiftly, he exhorts them to oversee their flock, not for filthy lucre, but of a free and ready mind. But our Lord Prelates, and their Curate Priests are of another mind, as being hirelings, and no true shepherds, so as it is with them, No penny, no Pater noster; they look more to their tithes, then to their task, and more after the fleece, then for the good of the flock. Sixtly, Not as Lords over God's Heritage; yea Mud' o's katakurieuontes, nor as Lording it ever God's Heritage. The same word is used in Mat. 20. 25. Mark. 10. 42. Where such Heathen-like Lording, is by Christ himself forbidden his Disciples, as 
* Chap. 2.  before is showed. But the Pontificians, and so our Lordly Prelates say, that this word katakurievein signifieth only a tyrannical Lordship, which they do not use. I answer, that in Luke kurieuein, to Lord it at all, is forbidden. And being put for katakurievin, it noteth, that all manner of Lordship over the flock of God is forbidden to Christ's true Ministers. Nor can the Prelates (whether Pontifician, or Protestant in Name) so easily clear their Lordly Dominion over God's people from Tyranny. For even our great Prelate himself sticks not to charge the Church of Rome with 
‡ Confer pag. 298.  Tyranny. And can he discharge himself of it? Wherein comes the Primate of the Church of England short of the papal Tyranny, but in this, that the Pope tyrannizeth over the universal Church of the great world, and the Metropolitan or Metropolitician of all England tyrannizeth over that whole Church, which the Pope called the other world? The difference (I say) is only in the Magis & Minus, which alter not the nature of the thing. For, for the Pope's Inquisition, the Prelate hath his High-Commission; by the Law whereof though he cannot bring his heretic Puritans to the Stake, attended with fire and faggot, as the Pope's Inquisition doth, yet he can make their life more miserable, than death itself, by his pecpetuall close Imprisonments, and the like. Nor wants he either Canons and Ceremonies, as snares to catch, nor Pursuivants, as Beagles to hunt out the poor Sheep, and to hale them to his Shambles, for refusing to be fed with such hemlock, instead of God's wholesome word. Yea where his High-Commission cannot reach to suck the blood, and crucify the bodies of Christ's Servants, as upon the Pillory: he can easily remove the Cause into another Court, where himself sitting a grand and powerful Swaying Judge, will satisfy his bloodthirsty longing. And as in 
* Confer. pag. 204.  another place of his book he twitteth the Church of Rome for being a triumphant Church: Saying, Now She must be a Triumphant Church here; Militant no longer: So no less Triumphant hath the Prelate made his present prelatical Church of England. Oh, how doth he triumph in his chair, as in his chariot? Yea, more specially, how did he triumph over those. Three his Remarkable men, whom he (looking out at the Court-window beheld standing on the Pillory, and losing their ears and Blood; how did he then applaud his politic pate, and potent credit in Court, that he could thus anékesta, without rememedy (as the 
‡ Socrat. Hist. Eccle. lib. 1. c, 2.  Story saith of the Tyrant Licinius, a persecuter of the Christians) overthrow the most innocent Cause, and therein the most innocent Persons (and without all colour of contradiction, the Minister) that ever was Judged in any Christian Court. Thus he triumphed over them: though their triumph over him, and all his Antichristian lawless cruelty, in that their most constant courageous, and invincible cheerfulness in suffering, was as much more glorious, and noble, as his was most Ignoble, and Base. But thus (I say) the Prelate, with his prelatical Church, must be Triumphant: Militant no longer, but in warring against the lamb, and his poor followers. So as this Prelate, with his Confederates, are the Successors of the High-Priests, Scribes and Pharisees, and of Edmund Bonner, and Stephen Gardiner, those bloody Butchers and Wolves, which devoured and destroyed Christ's Sheep in Queen Mary's days; and therein were the Church-Triumphant in England. But this by the way. Return we now, whence we have a little (as it were) digressed, though not impertinent to our Purpose in hand, which is to show the true difference between the true Ministers of Christ, and those of Antichrist.  
Seventhly, therefore, Not as Lording it over God's Heritage, but being Ensamples to the flock. Now wherein are our Lord Prelates Ensamples to the flock? In their humble carriage? In their meekness of spirit? In the moderation of their government? In their continency, and contempt of Riches, Honours, Pleasures, Ease, and the like? Nay are they not Examples to the world (Far be it from God's flock) of extreme Pride, Ambition, covetousness, voluptuousness, idleness, profaneness, lawlesseness, extreme Cruelty, barbarous Injustice, implacable Malice, and intolerable Tyranny, palpable hypocrisy, and such like prelatical virtues and graces, the most proper and peculiar endowments, inseparable qualities of their hierarchy? Eightly, and lastly, true Elders, or Bishops, that with a good Conscience feed God's flock, both with the wholesome food of sound Doctrine, and with the holy Example of a good life, shall, when the chief shepherd shall appear, receive a Crown of glory, that fadeth not away. Where I observe two particulars: that Jesus Christ is the only chief or arch-shepherd. O A' rkipóimen. So as here is no place, either for Pope, over the universal Church, or Metropolitan over a whole kingdom, or for Arch-prelate over the provincial, or yet Prelate over all the shepherds in his Diocese; for then such should be o', the chief shepherds: but this Title and Office is peculiar to Christ alone, and incommunicable to any other. Nor did Peter himself, arrogate to himself any such Title, but was content with 
* ● Pet. 5. 1.  o' sumpresbúteros, a fellow-eld, as if an equal to those Elders, or Presbyters, to whom he writ. The second particular I note is, that all such Presbyters, or true Bishops (as aforesaid) may and do most certainly expect, and shall most surely receive, at the appearing of the Chief shepherd, an immarcescible Crown of Glory-Behold, here is such a Reward, as no Lord Prelate can expect, or hope for. For these are rightly resembled by 
‡ ● Luk. 16.  Dives, to whom (being in hell torments, and desiring one drop of water to cool his tongue) Abraham answered, Son remember, that thou in thy life time receivedst thy good things, &c. For he had gone in his purple and fine linen, and fared deliciously every day, while mercilessy he suffered poor Lazarus to lie at his gate full of sores, yielding him no relief, or comfort at all; saving that his dogs came, and licked his Sores. And do not our Diveses, our rich Lord Prelates (and which of them is poor) go in their Purple, satin, Velvet, and the finest linen, as their Lawn sleeves and Rochet, and fair deliciously every day, not enduring once in their lives, with their good wills, to keep one extraordinary Fast day, so zealous are they of the observation of Lent, and other Embers; wherein they can fair deliciously with the choicest Fish, and Fruits, and Wines, and other Cates. So as with Dives they have their good things here. Only these come short of, and outstrip Dives in some things: For First, Dives yet suffered Lazarus to be laid at his doors: but these beat away the true Lazars from their doors, 2. Dives suffered his dogs to show so much compassion, as to lick Lazarus his sores: but our Lord Prelates do set their dogs at the true lazaruses, to tear them in pieces; 3. Lazarus brought his sores with him, Dives did not cause them: but our Lord Prelates do fill God's lazaruses full of wounds, which they carry away with them, not scaping from their Gates with a whole Skin; 4. Lazarus was willingly laid at Dives his gates: but God's lazaruses never come to the Lord-Bishops Gates, but with an ill will, when they are hailed and pulled; 5. Dives denied his crumbs, to Lazarus, because they were of his bread to feed his dogs: but the Prelates do not only deny any one Crumme of mercy, when they are offended, or to do right when the lazaruses are injured: but they do also rob, pill and poll them, stripping them of all they have, and so do not relieve, but make Lazars.  
Again, on the other side, Lazarus in some sort may be an emblem of God's true Ministers: For Lazarus had all his evil things in this world: So the good and faithful Ministers of God must undergo manifold afflictions, tribulations, and persecutions in the world, as our Saviour 
* Luk 21. 12.  Christ forewarned his Disciples, and so their true Successors, 
Mat. 24. 9  to wit, Godly and painful Ministers of the Word; who find their Master's words verified in themselves, by manifold experience of tributations and persecutions, which they mainly and chiefly suffer at the hands of Antichrist, and his Antichristian Prelates; as the world itself is able to bear witness. In the kingdom of England at this day, who are the great persecutors, yea and the only oppressors of God's faithful and painful Ministers, and of all true Professors, but these Lordly Prelates, who will not suffer any one, Minister, or other, to burrow within their Diocese (if he do but smell of a Puritan, as they call them) but do ferret them out, and hunt them to the death? Where by the way it is clear to all men, that have but common sense, that the Prelates (which are, and ever have been (at least since Antichrist hath been aloft) the most furious and fiery persecutors of God's good Ministers and people, even for Religion sake) are false Bishops, falsely pretending their jurisdiction from Christ, and their Succession from the Apostles. They might as well say, that they have Authority from Christ, and his Apostles to afflict, persecute, and oppress all true Religion, with all the true Preachers, and Professors thereof, and so prove themselves to be of those of whom Christ foretold his Disciples, saying, 
* Iob. 16. 2.  They shall put you out of the Synagogues, yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you, will think that be doth God Service. And surely the Prelates, grounding their usurped Authority upon Christ, which they so exercise in afflicting and oppressiing Christ's Ministers and people, must needs consequently conclude, that this their persecution is a special part of God's service. to conclude, than the Parable; as these Prelates have their good things here, and nothing is left them, but a 
‡ Heb. 10. 27.  fearful expectation of judgement and fiery indignation, which shall devour the Adversaries, so as they shall not find a drop of mercy in Hell, who would not show a crumb of mercy here, but contrariwise shall be tormented with more scorching flames, than Dives, by how much their wickedness here exceeded his: So God's faithful Ministers, as they receive their evil things here (and especially at the hands of Antichristian Prelates, whose malice and cruelty against them exceedeth all other in the world) so they shall be sure to receive a most glorious and unfading 
‡ 2 Tim. 4. 8.  Crown of Glory, which the Lord, the chief shepherd, the righteous judge shall give unto them, at that day, nor to them only, but to all those that love his Appearing.   

CHAP. VII.  
Wherein is showed, that the Prelates are no less contrary to the practice of the Apostles (whose Successors notwithstanding they pretend to be) than they are to their Doctrines; as hath been proved.  
FOr the more clear demonstration hereof, we will consider the practice of the Apostles in a twofold notion: 1. the practice of their Ministry: 2. the practice of their life and conversation. First, for their Ministry: that also we consider in a double respect: 1. of Doctrine. 2. of Discipline. Of these being to speak, we will first consider the Apostles two ways: 1. as they were Apostles: and 2. as they were Ministers. First, as they were Apostles, to speak in a strict and proper sense, they left no Successors behind them. For as Apostles, 1. they had their immediate Calling from Christ: 2. they did 
* 1 Cor. 9 1.  see Christ with their bodily eyes: 3. they were inspired immediately from Christ with apostolical Gifts and Graces of the Holy Ghost, 
‡ John 16. 13.  which led them into all truth, so as their judgement was infallible, they could not err: 4. they were made the penmen of the Scripture: 5. They had a power given them to appoint evangelists to attend their Apostleship in the gospel, to settle and water, where the Apostles had planted, and where they appointed them: 6. They had 
‡ Act. 8. 26. & 16. 6.  immediate direction from the Holy Ghost where to preach at such, or such a time: 7 They had their 
§ Mat. 28. 19 20.  commission immediately from Christ, which was to preach the gospel throughout the world, though the 
† Act. 13. 2●  Holy Ghost did more particularly dispose of them to several Countries. Now in all these respects the Apostles, as Apostles left no Successors behind them. For after the decease of Apostles, and so also of the evangelists (some whereof writ the gospel, and some preached the gospel, and did other things at the Apostles appointment; whereof we shall have occasion to speak more anon) their Office of Apostles and evangelists, ceased. So as, never since they lived, have there been any Apostles or evangelists, properly so called. Though in a general notion all true Preachers of the gospel, in as much as they have a Calling from God, being sent of him, though mediately by the Church, may be called Apostoli, that is, sent, (as the Apostle called Epaphroditus 
‡ Phil. 2. 25.  A'póstolon, the philippìans' Apostle, which our English translates a Messenger, because they had sent him to him) as they are called in the self same respect Aggeloi, 
* Revel. 1. 20.  Angels, or Messengers: and they may be called also for the same reason evangelists, because they are Preachers of the gospel. But I say, strictly and properly the Apostles only were called Apostles, and the evangelists evangelists, for the reasons aforesaid. So as after their decease, the ordinary Ministers of the Word which God appointed to succeed them in their Ministry, were called Pastors and Teachers, as Eph. 4. 11. and sometimes Presbyters or Elders, and Overseers, or Episcopi, set over their several Congregations respectively as aforesaid) and sometimes 
‡ An. 26. 1●. Col. 1. 23.  u' pereta, or díakoni, Ministers of the Word; as the Apostle often styles himself.  
So as in the Second place we come to speak of the practice of the Apostles, as they were Ministers of the Gospel, whose examample all true Ministers imitating, are said to be their true Successors. But before we speak thereof, one Objection crosseth us in our way, which is this. We noted before, that one peculiar privilege and badge of an Apostle properly so called, was, that he had the Holy Ghost immediately inspired into him by Christ, so as it led him into all truth, that he could not err in his preaching, or writing of the word of God. Now it is Objected, that the promise of 
* Mat. 28. 20. Objection.  Christ's spiritual presence, and so of the Holy Ghost, is made to the Apostles, but to all the succeeding generations of all their true Successors to the end of the world. Upon which promise (but most falsely applied) the Pope doth build his Imaginary Infallibility, of a power of not erring in the faith.  
For answer 
Answer.  hereunto briefly. First, neither the Pope, nor any Prelate, have any thing to do with this promise. For they have no Calling from Christ, as hath been proved; and they are Antichrists, and so led by another spirit, to wit, of him, of whom they have their Calling, and that is, of the great red Dragon; as remains yet further to be cleared Secondly, concerning this promise made immediately by Christ to his Apostles, that he would be with them to the end of the world, and that the Holy Ghost should lead them into all truth: we must distinguish between the Apostles, and all Succeeding true Ministers. First, this promise was actually fulfiled to the Apostles, so as they neither erred in their preaching, nor in their writing of the word of God; and the substance of all their preaching (so far as it is necessary for the salvation of God's church to the end of the world) is by them left in writing to be a rule of our faith, and the ground of all holy and saving knowledge. Now than all true Ministers, succeeding the Apostles in all ages, and also all true believers, though they neither receive the Holy Ghost inmiediately from Christ as the Apostles did, nor are any to expect to receive it in that extraordinary way: yet all true believing both Ministers and persons do receive the Holy Ghost. But how? By what means? The Apostle tells us, 
‡ gall 3. 2.  By the hearing of Faith preached; that is, by hearing the gospel (which is the ground of Faith) preached, 
Act. 10. 44.  we receive both faith, and the Holy Ghost. Now as we received the Holy Ghost by hearing of Faith preached: So this Spirit of God doth guide us into all truth, by and according unto the Scripture. And as the Holy Ghost is (as I may so say) 
§ Gal. 4. 19●  begotten in us by the Seed of God's word Sown in our hearts (though properly we are begotten again by the Holy Ghost) so this Holy Ghost is as it were, nourished and preserved in us by and through the word of God, even as the light of the Lamp is nourished by the oil, or as the breath goeth with the voice or word spoken; or as the blood hath its course in the veins, or the vital Spirits have their Seat in the heart; or as the animal Spirits in the brain, when they are derived into all the parts of the body in the Arteries and veins, so as all the members are thereby actuated and moved. And as the Philosopher saith of natural bodies, 
* Aristot. De Ortu. & in teritu. lib. 2.  A'panta trephétas tois a'utois, e'x o`pér e`isi: All things are nourished by self same Substance, whereof they are begotten, or have their beginning or being: So in a sort it may truly be said, that as we begin Spiritually to live by the Holy Ghost through Faith by the Preaching of the word of God: So this Holy Ghost in the several graces and operations there of is preserved, and as it were nourished in us by the continual ministration of the food of the same word in our souls: Or in a word, the Holy Ghost hath no operation in us, either for instruction, or illumination, or consolation, or corroboration of any Grace in our souls, but in and by, or according to the word of God. So as besides God's written word, there are no revelations of the Spirit to be expected in God's true Church. Secondly therefore, the promise of the Holy Ghost to Christ's true Church and Children, succeeding the Apostles even to the end of the world, is made good to all and every particular member of Christ's mystical body, whether Ministers or People: so as in the matter of their faith, and whatsoever appertains to their salvation, they are by Christ's Spirit guided into all truth, being led by the rule and light of God's word, which to those that are in Christ never goes unaccompanied with the Holy Ghost. For, even as 
* Rom. 8. 14.  so many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the Sons of God; So as, If any man have not the Spirit of Christ, the same is none of his: So none are led by the Spirit of God, but those that are led by the word of God. And therefore as Christ's Spirit dwells in all his, so his 
‡ Ioh. 15. 7.  Word also. For these two are inseparable; the Holy Ghost teaching us no other things, but what we find written in the word of Christ. To which purpose Christ saith, When 
§ Iob. 16. 13.  the Spirit of Truth is come, be will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself: but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak. Now the whole Scripture is Christ's word: this the Holy Ghost receiving from Christ revealed to his Apostles, or (as Christ saith) 
† Ioh, 14. 26.  brought to their remembrance: and the Apostles committed those things to writing (as the Holy Ghost directed them) for our both instruction, and remembrance. So as if 
* Isa. 8. 20.  any speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. Whatever Spirit men brag of, not indurcing the Law and Testimony of the Scripture, it is without light, a counterfeit Spirit, a lying spirit. And this is that very Spirit of Antichrist, and of his Prelates, who to advance their own Canons and Decrees, and to cry up their usurped Antichristian Authority, in taking upon them to be the only visible judges in matters of faith (as 
* Cap. 3.  before we have noted of our Prelate of Cant.) as if they had the Spirit of Infallibility, and were the only men of God's Privy counsel, and the only Privilegiats not to err: do so much depress, vilify and cry down the Authority and sufficiency of the Scripture, as if it were a 
‡ See the Prelates Relation. Sect. 16. throughout.  dumb, dead, and blind judge, having not so much light in it, as is sufficient to demonstrate it to be the word of God, but what it must be beholden to the Authority and Tradition of the present prelatical Church for. But o ye blind Guides, 
§ Esa. 8. 20.  To the Law, and to the Testimony: for while ye speak not accordiag to this word, but contrariwise blaspheme the same: it is a manifest sign, that there is neither light, nor 
‡ Ioh. 6. 53.  life in you,  
Come we now to prosecute the remainder of the former particulars propounded: the second general whereof is, the practice of the Apostles, as they were Ministers of the gospel, whose example all true Ministers imitating, are said to be their true Successors. And first of this practice in regard of Doctrine, to wit, in their Ministy of the Word, and Sacraments. First for their Doctrine, it was sound and sincere, the very word of God, which they preached with all diligence, and good Conscience; exhorting other Ministers also to the like diligence and faithfulness in preaching: as 2 Tim. 4. 1, 2. I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, &c. Preach the word, be instant, in season, out of season, &c. Thus did the Apostles. But do our Prelates thus? First, do they preach diligently? Are their Sermons, any more, then 2 or 3 festivals in the year? And do they preach sound Doctrine? Nay as the Apostle there saith, They will not endure sound doctrine; they neither preach it themselves, nor permit others. And instead of exhorting Ministers to be diligent in preaching, and teaching the people, they flatly forbid them to preach so often, as twice on the Sabbath, or to expound the Catechisine, for instructing the People. Thus they are enemies of God's word, and so of the salvation of God's people. Are these men than Successors of the Apostles? again, for the two Sacraments, the Apostles administered them duly according to 
‡ 1 Cor. 11. 23  Christ's institution, not varying one title from it; they neither detracted any thing from it, nor added aught of their own inventions. Now doth the prelatical Catholic Church, (wherein that of England, and of Rome are both one and the same, and do profess one and the same faith and Religion, as our great Prelate saith; noted before) thus? Now Rome's detractions and additions, we all know. But what hath the prelatical Church of England done in this kind? 1. Do they not detract both from Christ's institution, and from the dignity of the Sacraments, while they set dumb Priests, no better than masspriests, to administer? Do they not detract from baptism, while they do as much debase it in comparison of the Lord's Supper, as they do exalt this (which they 
* Relation of the Conf. p. 136.  call the Great Eucharist) in comparison of that? Do they not administer that, near the belfry, or Church-door, the lowest part of the Church, as they estimate it: and this at the end of the Chancel, their highest part of the Church? Secondly, do they not alter Christ's institution by adding to the Sacraments of their own superstitious inventions? do they not add an empty and airy sign of the cross to baptism, the o mission whereof is no less heinous, then of baptism itself? And have they not added a long form of liturgy to the administration of both the Sacraments? Have they not altered the Table for the Lord's Supper, into an Altar for a sacrifice, which is also as great a derogation from the sufficiency of Christ's only sacrifice on the cross, as it is an alteration, yea and an annihilation of this Sacrament, which is to be administered as a supper, on a Table, not as a sacrifice, on an Altar. And this they do also, in imposing a necessity of kneeeling at the receiving of the Sacrament, whereby they overthrow the nature of a Supper. To omit their necessity of private baptism, and of carrying their Host to a man on his death bed: would they not also of 
‡ As in Dr. coosins' book of Private Devotions, or canonical, hours.  late years have brought again into the Church of England the other 5 Sacraments of the Romish Church, that so the Church of England and of Rome might in nothing be unlike in their practice, as they are not in profession, as our said Prelate saith: Thus are our Prelates herein Successors of the Apostles?  
Secondly, for the Apostles practise in point of Discipline. And this is either in Ordination of Ministers, or Reformation and correction of manners, or imposition of Ceremonies. For the first, Ordination of Ministers, we read, of Timothy's ordination no less by the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery, then of Paul himself. Titus indeed was appointed by Paul to ordain Elders in every City in Crect (as was noted before) but if he did this alone, without the Presbytery, 2 necessity must needs be supposed, which is neither Rule nor Law in ordinary Cases. And by the way, whether Titus and Timothy were Diocesan Bishops, as the Prelates pretend, we shall see in a more fit place. And for Ordination this we are sure of, that whoever have the charge of it, Prelates have nothing at all to do with it, because (as is already proved) they are no lawful Ministers of Christ, much less Successors of the Apostles. again, whom did the Apostles, and Presbytery ordain Ministers of the word, but such, as were every way qualified with gifts and graces for preaching, and the like; as we see prescribed in 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1? They were not like to jerobeams Priests, nor any of those, whom the Prelates do make Priests, which are 
* Esa. 56. 10, 11, 12.  dumb dogs (as the Prophet calls them) blind watchmen, that love to sleep, to take their ease, greedy dogs, that are never satisfied with heaping up Living upon Living, they fill themselves with strong drink, and are good Fellows, not good Ministers. Yea such as are truly qualified, either Prelates do not ordain them: or they do afterwards, seeing how they prove painful in their Ministry, put them to silence, or suspend and persecute them, as before is noted. And again Thirdly, The Apostles, and Presbyters in their time, ordained none for money; for offering whereof 
‡ Act. 8.  Simon Magus was accursed; but our Prelates ordain tag and rag for money, so as the ordinary Fees come to 3, 4, 5, or 6 pounds. So as in point of Ordination how do our Prelates prove themselves to be Successors of the Apostles? And lastly, the Apostles and their lawful successors Ordained none, but lawful Ministers of the gospel: but our Prelates do ordain a new Order of Priests, bringing in, and setting up a new Priesthood, which is Antichristian, not having any foundation in the Sccripture. Prelates therefore in Ordrnation are no Successors of the Apostles.  
Secondly, for matter of Censure, or for Reformation and correction of Manners, as for instance, in the Censure of Excommunication, the Apostles, though as Apostles, they might do of themselves, yet as Ministers they did it not, but with the whole Congregation; or else the Congregation with the Presbyters; as we see 1 Cor. 5 3. 4. 5. Insomuch, as even Prelates themselves, after they first had taken footing, as being the time of their Innocency (as I may say) observed this Order. So as Cyprian, who lived about 250. years after Christ's nativity, would do nothing in this kind, without the consent both of the Presbytery and people. This lasted during the 10. Persecutions: but Peace and Prosperity succeeding, it degenerated into that height of Tyranny by degrees, to which we see it arrived at this day. Secondly, Excommunication was for weighty Causes, as in the same place; and 1 Tim. 1. 20. The Apostles had no Prelates Courts, or Consistories, where they did Privately by themselves, or by a dumb Priest Excommunicatt for every trifle, and especially for the least breach of a Canon, and the like (as we noted before) but the Consistory was the whole Congregation solemnly assembled, where no Censure was imposed, but for great offences, and those breaches of God's Laws, and of Christ's Ordinance. Nor were those Censures remitted, but in and by the whole Congregation, after public satisfaction given by the offender to the offended. Whereas our Prelates, in all, do quite contrary, absolving also great offenders for a fee, without any signs of Repentance, much less fruits of Reformation, and satisfaction made to the Congregation offended. Whereas the Apostles absolved none, before the Congregation was first satisfied by, and so pacified towards the offender; as 2 Tim. 2. 10. Do our Prelates thus? No such thing. Therefore no Successor of the Apostles.  
Thirdly, for Imposition of Ceremonies in the worship of God, the Apostles were so far from laying any such yoke, upon Christians necks, or any such snares for their feet, as they did utterly condemn all human Rites and Ordinances whatsoever in God's service, laying also a special charge upon Christians not to put their necks under such yokes, unless thereby they would renounce Jesus Christ for their only King, and Lord over their Consciences and souls in all matters of faith, and the worship of God. In one Chapter (colloss.. 2.) the Apostle beats them all down, whether they be old Jewish Ordinances (now abolished under the gospel) or of man's devising, and imposing. First, for Jewish Ceremonies, he saith, they are 
* Verse 16, 17.  Shadows, which now upon the death of Christ are all vanished, and abolished. Secondly, all other Rites and Ceremonies, which are of man's devising, he calls them 
‡ verse 8.  Philosophy, and vain deceit, traditions of men, rudiments of the world; not after Christ: a 
‡ v. 18.  voluntary humility, as worshipping of Angels, and so Idolatry; an intrusion into things not seen in Scripture; of a fleshly mind vainly puffed up; which separate from the 
§ v. 19  head, Christ; they 
† v. 20.  evacuate Christ's death, wherein he did 
‡ v. 14.  blot out the handwriting of all such Ordinances, nailing it to his cross, &c. So as now to be subject to such, is to renounce Christ's death, and make it of none effect: and they 
* v. 22.  perish with the using, are good for nothing, being after the commandments and Doctrines of men: they have but a mere show of wisdom in will-worship and humility, and hypocrisy in not sparing the body, and only serve to satisfy the flesh. Arguments Sufficient to any one, that fears God, and hopes to be saved by Jesus Christ, to 
* v. 8.  Beware of being spoiled, and made a prey (as the word signifieth) of being 
‡ v. 18.  heguiled of their reward by such a bondage and Slavery. Thus the Apostle so damning all manner of Rites and Ceremonies imposed on the Conscience in the worship of God, so as he shows it to be a very apostasy from Christ, of such as hold not the Head: with what face can our Lord Prelates (the great Masters of all manner of Superstitious and Idolatrous, both Jewish, and Heathenish, Romish and Antichristian Ceremonies) bear themselves to be the Successors of the Apostles, while not only they erect such Superstitions, but with all rigour impose them upon men's Consciences as a most insupportable burden, and intolerable bondage, and with all severity and cruelty inflict terrible punishments upon those, that refuse to perform the Tasks of such Egyptian Taskmasters? Or how dare they affirm, that they have such their jurisdiction from Christ, while in so doing, usurping such a Power over men's Consciences, they thrust Jesus Christ out of his Throne? But we shall have occasion to speak more of this hereafter. Thus we see in the mean time what kind of Vice-Roys of Christ, and Successors of his Apostles, the Prelates prove themselves to be, in Lording over the Consciences of God's people by their Superstitious Ceremonies, and Romish Rites.  
But perhaps they will object the Apostles determination (Act. 15.) concerning the Gentiles newly converted to Christianity, that they should abstain from eating of blood, and things strangled, which was a Mosaical Rite. To which I answer: First, that the Apostles in the 
§ v. 10.  same place do show, that that burden of legal Ceremonies was removed by the death of Christ, and buried in his Grave. Secondly, they did this, in regard of the Jews, which dwelled among those Christians, for the time being for peace-sake, until the 
† v. 21.  Christian Jews were better confirmed in the faith and knowledge of Christ. Thirdly, they did it by the special direction of the 
‡ v. 2●.  Holy Ghost, for the reason alleged. So as that example being extraordinary, and for the time of the infancy of the gospel, it is no rule for us to follow now, after so long a shining forth of the gospel. And I might add this moreover, that the Apostles did not this alone, but with the whole Congregation, the Presbyters, or Elders, and Brethren being joined with them. Whereas our Prelates, though they confess that a 
* Con. pag. 261.  general council hath no immediate Institution from Christ to determine Controversies; but that it was prudently taken up in the Church, from the Apostles example, Act. 15. yet for all their prudence in taking up that, which belongs not unto them, they show themselves very unfaithful, while they follow not the example of the Apostles in determining alone, and not with the whole Congregation; and therefore Christians have the less reason to captivate their faith to prelatical Decrees, either in a general council, where the Pope of Rome, and of Canterbury are the rulers of the roast, or in a Convocation, where the Pope of Canterbury is Prime, Primate, Metropolitan, and All, who without the Holy Ghost (which is never given to any such Antichristian Assemblies) whatever they decree in point of faith, or otherwise, be it never so erroneous, yet they enjoin obedience thereunto by all men; as our 
‡ Confer pag 226. 227.  Prelate affirmeth.  
But he will not be so easily beaten off from his Ceremonies: For in his 
§ Epist. Dedi. pag. 19 20.  Epistle Dedicatory he tells the King, That Ceremonies are necessary for the setting out of God's worship His Great witness to the world that our hair stands right in that Service of God, to wit, the inward worship. Take this away or bring it into contempt, and what light is there left to shine before men, that they may see our Devotion, and glorify our Father which is in heaven. And to deal clearly with your Majesty, these thoughts are they, and no other, which have made me labour so much as I have done, for Decency, and an Orderly Settlement of the external worship of God in the Church; which cannot be without some Ceremonies, &c. For Ceremonies are the hedge, that fear the Substance of Religion, &c. And a great weakness it is, not to see the strength, which Ceremonies add even to Religion itself, &c. So and much more the Prelate. Whence it appeareth, that had he not Ceremonies to garnish his worship of God (as he calls it the world could not see how right his heart stands, nor yet see his good works; because instead of good works perverting Christ's word) he puts his Devotion, and his Devotion stands in his Ceremonies; which he saith must not be too few, for than they leave his Service naked, and therefore to avoid that he must have both a Surplice, and Hood, and Cope, to cover that nakedness. So as all his light is in his external worship shining forth in his brave garb of Ceremonies; as that of the Pharises in their broad phylacteries. So as without this, men (in truth) could not so easily see the pride, vanity, Superstition, and hyprocrisy, which lurketh in the Prelates heart, and bewrayeth itself in his many inventions of Superstitious Ceremonies, the very Ideas and Idols of his profane heart. And Antiquity was the Mystery of Iniquity; if that will do them any pleasure. This we generally touched before in the Third Chapter.  
But for the Second, That the prelacy is this Mystery of Iniquity, let us a little examine what is meant by this Mystery of Iniquity. This Mystery of Iniquity is opposed to the Mystery of godliness, of which the Apostle speaks, 1 Tim. 3. 16. Iniquity is opposite to godliness: but both godliness and Iniquity are called a Mystery. Yet in a different respect. The Mystery of godliness is so called, because of its deepness, and difficulty to be understood, but by God's 
* 1 Cor. 2. 9 10.  Spirit revealing the same: but the Mystery of Iniquity is so called, because Iniquity is vailed under a pretence and show of godliness, by which 
‡ Rev. 13. 8. 2 Thes. 2. 10.  many are deceived, 
§ Mat. 24. 5.  whose names are not written in the book of life. As Christ saith,† Many shall come in my Name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many. And thus do all Prelates come in Christ's Name, while they pretend Christ's Authority, and usurp Christ's throne over his People. And the great Antichrist is so called, because though he be against Christ, yet he saith, he is for Christ, as being Christ's Vicar; even as Antichristus in the Greek is a compound word, the Preposition Anti signifying both for, or instead, and against. And so is Antichrist, in pretence for Christ, but in practice against Christ: and so are all our Prelates; as shall yet further appear. And this is truly and properly the Mystery of Iniquity. In which respect the Turk, and other professed Enemies of Christ, and Christian Religion cannot come within the compass of this Mystery of Iniquity, and so cannot be full Antichrists, because they do gum kephale, openly, without any veil, profess this Iniquity, of being Adversaries to Christ.  
And for the further application of this mystery of Iniquity to the Prelates, we come to the third Proposition: That, What is spoken of the great Antichrist himself, is spoken of all Prelates, as members of the same Head, or as so many inferior antichrists, though in themselves great enough. Let us therefore see the properties of Antichrist here described by the Apostle. First he is called, That man of sin: And this is Antichrist in two respects: 1. in respect of himself, as being carnal, proud, covetous, ambitious, voluptuous, and a most malicious hater, and most cruel persecuter of the Saints and Servants of Christ, a proper sin of Antichrist; These sins and Lusts are the proper sins of a Prelate, and common to every Prelate, and especially those of the latter Stamp, since Antichrist mounted aloft, now for above 600. years, yea a 1000 years from Boniface 3. Secondly, Antichrist is that man of Sin, in respect of others, as being a prime instrument of causing others to Sin: as by giving Indulgence, Dispensation, and Liberty to men to Sin, and by suppressing the means whereby they should be kept from Sin. The Pope is notorious for this. And our Prelates come not far behind him. For they allow profane sports on the Lord's day, by which the 4th commandment is broken: and that to Servants and Children so as their Parents and Masters may not restrain them; which is a manifest breach of the Fift commandment: so as by this means many other commandments are broken in committing many sins. Thus they both 
* Math.  break the greatest commandments, and teach men so. Again instead of suppressing of sports, they restrain and suppress the Preaching of God's word, whereby men should be kept from sin, and learn to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world, denying all ungodliness and worldly lusts. Thus Antichrist is that man of sin.  
Secondly, Antichrist is called the Son of Perdition For as he is that man of sin: so by consequence he is that Son of Perdition' and that in both the foresaid respects, as of Sinning, so of Perishing: for as he both Sins himself, and causes others to Sin: so he both perisheth himself, and causeth others to perish, as 2 Thess. 2. 10. And this is proper to the Pope in the first place, whose necessity of perishing is such, that himself confesseth an impossibility of amendment. As is noted of Adrian 6. who said, 
* Hist. Concil. Trid. lib. 1.  That the condition of Popes was miserable, seeing it was evident, that they could not do good, though they desired and endeavoured it never so much. And Pope 
‡ In Platina, of the lives of the Popes.  Marcell flapping his hand on the Table, said, It was impossible, that any one Sitting in that chair could be Saved. And his own decretals say, That if the Pope carry with him millions of souls to be tormented with the great Devil, no man may reprove him. So incorrigible he is. And this is according to Christ's saying, 
§ Mat. 19 24.  That it is easier for a Camel to go through the eye of a needle, then for a Rich man to go into the kingdom of heaven. And are Prelates in any better condition? Is there any more hope of them, then of the Pope, that ever they can or will repent? If they will repent indeed, that they may not be the Sons of perdition, either in themselves, or also in others, they must get them out of the chair of Pestilence, they must in one word, abandon their prelacy, and prelatical practices. Will they do this, and so cease both to sin themselves, and to cause others to Sin? This were happy for them. And this were the only way to free them from being the Sons of Perdition, namely by ceaseing to be those men of Sin. But if Chrysostom said of Prelates in his days, that he wondered, if any of them could be saved: then what would he have said of the Prelates in our days?  
Thirdly, Antichrist is called o `antikeímenos, that Adversary. But still under a pretext of being a friend; as before is noted. Thus Antichrist is the grand Adversary, o' a'ntikeímenos, opposite, or set against. But against whom? Against Christ, against his word, against his Ministers, against his people, even all true professors of the gospel, against all true Religion. Such is the Pope, and such are the Prelates, as their practices do plainly prove, and openly proclaim them to be.  
And Fourthly, here is added by a Copulative, kaì u`prairomenos, and He that exalts himself (as our English renders it) Over whom? Over all that is called God, or that is worshipped. Epìpantà, Over all, or against all (as some Translation hath it) that is called God. For the Preposition e'pì may signify both. But for Against we have a'ntikeímenos, opposite, and so this we may take for lifting himself up over all that is called God, or that is worshipped; which we may understand two ways, either over all Religion (as before we noted) or over all Policy, and civil Government, over Kings, and Princes and Magistrates, who are 
* Psal. 82.  called Gods, and over the Emperor himself, who is called sébastos, which is venerable, or worshipful; and the honour of Caesar which is called sèbasma (as in the Text) over which this Antichrist exalts himself. Now that this is verified of the Pope, it needs no proof, as being as clear as the Sun at noon day, and which impudency itself hath not the face to deny. But now for our Prelates, how is this verified of them? For they would seem to be friends to Kings and Princes, insomuch as they are by Princes themselves openly proclaimed to be a holy Order most Christian in itself, most peaceable in Civil States, and most consonant to minarchy, or the like. For answer whereunto: First, if the Pope their Sire be such an Adversary, and so exalted, how can the Prelates be excused, seeing they are of the same Spirit, as the members actuated by the Head? Secondly, if Prelates be (as their ordinary practices do show) Adversaries and opposites to Christ, and to his word, as well as the Pope is (as before is noted) how can their hierarchy be said to be either most Christian in itself, or most peaceable to Civil States, or most consonant to monarchy? Can such an hierarchy be most Christian, which is most Antichristian? Or can it be peaceable for a Civil State, that professeth Christianity, yea and the true Religion, to uphold and maintain such as are most notorious Adversaries to Christ, and to the Gospel? Or can that be most Copsonant to a Monarchy (professing to be under Christ the only Monarch, on whom all others depend, and to be governed by good and just laws, and not by a lawless Tyranny, which itself is an hierarchical Tyranny, and such as Tyranniseth over souls, bodies, and estates? Or can Prelates be true Friends to Princes, who under a false vizard of Friendship labour to corrupt them by their flattery, to make them forget they are men, to make them disaffected with their good Subjects, to make them the Authors of Innovation in Religion, by suppressing the Truth by their public Edicts, which tends to fill the People with discontents, and to stir up Sedition, and the like? Can this be safe for monarchy, or peaceable for the Civil State, or a thing in itself most Christian? Nor is it so only with our present Prelates. Revolve all Histories since Antichrists exaltation, and ye shall find that never any great Treasons have been, either against the persons of Princes, or their Civil States (if they were but suspected of disaffection to the Papacy, or Romish Religion) but either a Prelate, or some of his faction had his finger in it. But there it may suffice, that our eyes have been witnesses of the effects of prelatical pranks and practices, in being so busy and bold to bring in again the Romish Religion, and after the Gospel had taken such deep rooting. So as if our King's wisdom had not been the greater in composing things in a peaceable way (as foreseeing the dangerous Consequences that might have ensued, in case he should have by a strong hand gone about to have reduced that Antic bristian Government into that kingdom, which it had now cast out) God knows what woeful calamities such a war might have produced. But blessed be God, for preventing it.  
Again. As the Pope lifts up himself above and against all imperious Kings, and Princes; yea setting his feet on their necks, causing them to hold his stirrup, to lead his palfrey, and do such like Offices (as his holiness book of Ceremonies, and other Histories show) to hold their kingdoms in Fee from him, and the like: and as his Cardinals take place of Kings, his Arch-prelates of Dukes, his Prelates of Lords: So our Prelates (which come from them, and profess still to be of one and the same Church with them, of one and the same hierarchical Catholic Church, of one and the same Faith and Religion, as before is noted) do they not the like, according to their proportion, and degree? do not Archprelates take place of Dukes, and prelates of Lords? Nay, do they not set their feet upon the neck of the King's Laws, while they (though as yet de jure they cannot, yet de facto they do) exempt themselves from them, in that they by their power in Court, and threatenings in their own Courts, so terrify all Prohibitions, that they dare not peep, or show their Faces in the High-Commission; as the Author of the 
* See the apology. His Epistle to the judges. His Sermons.  apology, and Two Sermons, For God and the King, hath observed, though he hath paid dearly for his truth telling? Thus do they not u`praírethai, highly exalt themselves above all that is called God (as above Kings and Civil States) while they dare thus withdraw their necks from under the obedience of their good and just Laws (the benefit whereof the Kings good Subjects should enjoy in relieving themselves, and their innocent Cause from the Prelates unjust and tyrannical oppressions in the lawless proceeding in their Courts) and so set their proud feet upon the Kings both Laws, which are the sinews, and loyal People, which are the members of the same Body politic, whereof the King is the Head? Do they not herein come near their Father Pope, who trampleth upon Emperor's necks, when they dare tread upon the King's feet, as 
‡ Gen. 3. 15.  the Serpent did upon Christ's heel? And for this Cause is the hierarchy, or Antichristianism, called by the Apostle, the mystery of Iniquity. Yea the Mystery taes a'nomías, of lawlesseness; for which cause the Head of this Mystery, to wit, the Grand Antichrist, or the Pope, is called o`anomos, that lawless one, which our English turns, That wicked.  
So as here may fitly come in Antichrists Fift Title o` a'nomos, that lawless one. This the Pope proves himself to be, as being subject to no Laws, either of God, or man. So as (he saith) he hath all Laws folded up in the Cabinet of his own breast, as being the great Oracle of the world, and the only infallible judge in matters of Faith; at least, when he Sits in Peter's chair; and that he can dispense with the Apostle, and the like. But how doth his agree with our Prelates? Are they also such a'nomis, such lawless ones, as to merit the next place to the Pope, for the Title of Antichrist? Yes surely, they hold a correspondence with their sire, so as in all things they do patrifare, show themselves to be his Sons. Of their lawlesseness, in regard of Subjection to Prince's Laws, we spoke but now. And now remains to show how they are lawless, in regard of God's Laws. First, their hierarchy is not at all, nor in any thing (as neither grounded; so) regulated by the Law of God, and of Christ, but merely by their own lawless Canons, which are the Laws of their lawless kingdom. Yea, and when they list, they have a Prerogative to go either beyond, or against their Canons, in case their lust find not scope enough. Secondly, (as is noted before) they not only can dispense with God's Law, but dare and do annihilate it, and make it of no authority. For they do unmoralize the 4th commandment, as concerning the Sabbath day for Christians: they allow profane Sports thereon, which God's Law hath altogether forbidden: they forbid preaching on that day, which God's word commandeth to be both in season, and out of season: they altogether forbid preaching of the Doctrines of Grace, which God's word commends unto us, and commands to be preached: they Suspend the sense of the Articles of Religion touching. God's free Grace, thereby giving way to the contrary errors, which they forbid Preachers to confute, flatly against 
* Tit. 1. 9  God's commandment: they dispense with the fift commandment, dissolving the bond of obedience in Children and Servants to the Parents and Masters, and stripping those governors of their Authority over them, while they give them liberty to Sport, and run riot on the Lord's day, and threaten all that shall dare to control them. And herein also, they destroy man's Law: for the Law of the Land nowhere, either allows any such profane Sports on the Lord's days, but flatly forbids them: or forbids Parents and Masters to restrain their youth from such profanations, or to correct them, if they offend, and will not obey then lawful Commands: nor much less hath the Law of the Land given any such power and authority to any Civil Magistrate, or other, to punish those, that shall be brought before them, for exercising their lawful authority over those under their charge. And we all know, that the Prelates had the chief hand, not only in penning, but in publishing that book for Sports on the Lord's day, which is an open proclaiming of war against God, against Christ, against his holy Laws, against all holiness, against our Christian vow in baptism, against the good Laws of the Land, and Acts of Parliament, and against the very bonds of all civil and Natural Societies. And thus our Prelates are the most notorious lawless men (Only excepting the Grand Antichrist, the Pope, unless in some things they do outstrip him) that ever were in any Age of the world.  
Further, two ways more do the Prelates prove themselves to be o`i A'nomeis, those lawless men. As first, in hanging the Keys of Scripture at their Girdle, saying, that the Credit and belief of Scripture to be the word of God, doth necessarily depend upon the Authority and Tradition of the present Church, as the prime inducing cause to that belief. This our great Prelate in his said Book boldly affirmeth, and often repeateth, saying withal, that the Scripture hath not light enough in itself, is not sufficient to show and prove itself to be the word of God. So as the whole Authority of Scripture, depending upon Church-Tradition, and Authority, is necessarily made subject to episcopal Power, and so consequently the Law of God contained therein, shall not be Divine, unless it please their good Lordships to give their good word for it, and to make it of so much credit, by the vote of their Authority and Tradition, as that men may believe it to be God's Law. And upon this ground it is, that if the Prelates shall pronounce the 4th commandment not to be moral for the sanctifying of a Seventh day, yea the first day of the week, for Sabbath, and that Servants, and Children are not bound to yield obedience to their Masters and Parents on that day, in Case Civil or ecclesiastical Authority shall dispense with them to be free that day for their Sports. than all men must be of their opinion, that those commandments are none of God's commandments. The second way, whereby Prelates do show themselves lawless men, is by denying the Scripture to be judge in Controversus of Faith. For the said Prelate peremptorily saith, 
* pag. 378.  I absolutely make a lawful and free general council judge of Controversies, by and according to Scriptures. Which [By and according to the Scriptures] come in by the By, and are mere ciphers. For by these words he either means, That By and according to the Scriptures he absolutely makes, &c. which is most false: for by and according to the Scripture no general council is judge of Coneroversies; Neither by and according to the Scriptures hath the Prelate power absolutely to make a general council judge of Controversies: or else, by these words he doth but cast a mist before his Readers eyes to make him believe upon the first rebound of his words, that he makes Scripture the Rule, for general counsels to determine Controversies by. Whereas he means no such thing. For elsewhere he hath sundry speeches to the contrary: as 
‡ pag. 31.  The church's Declaration can bind us to peace, and external obedience, where there is not express letter of Scripture, and sense agreed upon. And again, If there be a jealousy or doubt of the sense of Scripture, a general council must judge the Difference: only Scripture must be the Rule. Now if Scripture be doubtful, and not clear, how can it be a rule to others, to judge by? But if Scripture be sufficiently and abundantly clear in itself in resolving of matters of faith for salvation, how come men to take upon them to be judges? But that the Scripture itself should be judge, the Prelate in no case, in no place of his book will allow of that: only he confesseth, that the Scripture is a 
* pag. 80. & 194.  judge, but without light Sufficient: visible, but not living, not speaking but by the Church. So as the judge he makes upon the matter both blind, and dead, and dumb. As the 
‡ Lighius. Hosius. de expresso Dei Verbo.  Papists make it a dead letter, and Leaden or Lesbian Rule, that so they may set the Church above it, to be Supreme judge. Thus our Prelates (if they will allow their Primate to speak for them) have made the Scripture, and so God's word of no Authority in and of itself, when it must depend both for its Authority, and Sense upon the Church and that the prelatical Church, or that Catholic, wherein the Church prelatical of England, and of Rome, are one and the Same. Are not the Prelates then, next after the Pope, those lawless men, branded here by the Apostle, under the name of that lawless one?  
We come now to the Sixth note of Antichrist in the Text: which is: that he at God sitteth in the Temple of God, showing himself, that he is God. Now the 
‡ 1 Cor. 3. 10. 17. & 6. 19 2 Cor. 6. 16.  Temple of God, properly, according to the New Testament (the ancient Temple of the Jews being abolished) is the soul and Conscience of every believer: or true Christian, namely a Spirttuall Temple. Now all that bear but the bear name of Christians, as Papists do, do also participate of the bare Name of such, as are the true Temples: and so in that respect, Antichrist is said to sit in, or upon or over the Temple of God. For sitting, argues a Seat, chair, or Throne, which Antichrist sets up in the souls and Consciences of all Papists, Sitting and reigning as King over them in all matters of faith. So as thus he makes himself a spiritual Lord, or King over them. And thus by Antichrists sitting is understood his raingning, as the Scripture doth often use this term: as Revel. 17. 1. 3. 15. and 18. 7. And so in other places of Scripture, by sitting, is understood reigning, as Heb. 1. 13. 1. Rev. 1. 13. Now that the Pope doth thus set up his throne, and sit and reign in the Consciences of men, who are the Subjects and vassals of his spiritual kingdom, himself cannot, will not deny. And he sits, as God, that is, assumes and exercises that power and authority over the Conscience, which appertains to God, to Christ alone. And thus he makes show, that he is God, as to whom God hath committed all his Power and authority unto. As the Pope calls himself Vice-God, Christ's Vicar, and the like, usurping whatsoever Titles of Power Christ hath in the Scripture: as we read of Leo 10, in the council of Lateran, calling himself the lion of the Tribe of Judah, and the like. And Bellarmine blusheth not to say, and therein to Blas-Pheme, that what soever is attributed to Christ in the Scripture, is communicated to his Vicar, the Pope. And thus is fulfiled that, which Christ, foretold, 
* Mat. 24. 5.  Many shall come in my Name, saying, I am, or I am Christ, and shall deceive many. Thus for the Pope, that man of sin, 
Mark 13. 6.  that son of Perdition, who opposeth and exalteth himself, above all that is called God, 
Luk. 21. 8.  or that is worshipped, that lawless one, that as God sits in the Temple of God, showing himself, that he is God. Now for our Prelates, are they not herein also, as in all the rest, at least petty Gods Sitting in the Temple of God, showing themselves to be so many Gods? As for their material Princely Thrones in material Temples, they have them set up in great State. But this is nothing to that Throne, which they have set up, and wherein they sit and reign, over the Consciences and souls of God's people; their multitude of Canons and Ceremonies being so many Laws by which they rule over them, and so many bonds or chains, whereby they hold them in spiritual bondage. And thus they sit also as God, in the Timple of God, showing themselves to be God, in saying they are Christ's Vice-Roys, and the Apostles Successors, having Authority from Christ to exercise that their jurisdiction and Power over God's People, who are the living Temples of the living God. Thus we see all along, how this Army of Priests (as Gregory and others call them) the Prelates, do follow their Captain and King Antichrist step by step, in all his properties here described by the Apostle.  
The last thing we propounded here to speak of, is, That apostasy must go before to strew the way, to the full revealation of the Mystery of Iniquity, and so of Antichrist, which apostasy was partly and primarily the prelacy. I say, partly and primarily. For partly the removal of the imperial Seat, from Rome to Constantinople by Constantine, and partly the decaying and declining of the Empire, and partly the defection of sundry kingdoms from the Empire, made way for Antichrists greatness, to which he grew not but by degrees, and that through many Ages. Yet the prime foundation of his Babylonian Tower was laid in the Apostles own times, they labouring to hinder it all they could, but not prevailing herein, they preached and writ against it, and so forewarned God's people to beware of it. And this foundation so long ago begun to be laid, was the prelacy, or rather the Spirit of prelacy, which had a time of working even while the Apostles lived, and became to be as it were an embryo or little mass, but did not receice the form of a body, till afterwards, and was long a growing up, until it came to the full stature. Now (I say) the spirit of prelacy was the very beginning of the apostasy, which was Antichrists way-maker.  
But how doth it appear, that this spirit of the prelacy began to work in the Apostles days? And then secondly, how will it appear, that this spirit of the Prelacy was and is an apostasy? For answer: First, that the prelacy began to get life in the Apostles time, it is manifest by sundry places of Scripture. As 2. Cor. 11. 20. Ye suffer (saith the Apostle to the Corinthians) if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself, if a man smite you on the face. Now the Apostle means here of those immediately mentioned before, to wit, false Ministers, whom he calls false Apostles, deceitful workers is transforming themselves into the Apostles of Christ, v. 13. 15. These (as young Prelates) would be apostolical men; and they have the qualities of Prelates, they Captivate God's people (as before) they devour, take, exalt themselves, smite; just Prelate-like. And for brevity (to omit sundry other places) we find one pretty brisk prelatical man in 3. Iob. 9 10. his Name was Diotrephes, and he did bear himself according to his Name, as one of Jupiter's nurslings: his qualities are these: 1. He loveth to have the preeminence. 2. he receiveth not the Apostles, and brethren: 3. he prateth against them with malicious words: 4. he neither receiveth the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would: 5. he casteth them out of the Church. lo here a pretty well grown prelatical Child, a pregnant spark to make a Lord Prelate of. For all his Properties are proper to a Prelate: for a Prelate, first, loves the preeminence: 2. though he pretend to Succeed the Apostles, yet his deeds show, that he hates both their Doctrine, and Example, persecuting them in their true Successors: 3. he receiveth not the brethren: yea 4. he so hates the very name of holy brethren, that he forbids all men to receive them: and 5. he casteth them out of the Church, he plays fie gib with his thunderbolt of Excommunication. I might insist more, and enlarge all these particulars: but this may suffice to show, that the Spirit of the prelacy was stirring in the womb of the Church, even while the Apostles lived.  
Now for the Second, it is no less true, that the Spirit of the Prelacy was and is an apostasy from Christ. This first appears by the Apostles former words of falling away first, which made way for Antichrist. And this began in the prelacy: for the Prelacy is the setting up of a new Church, a new kingdom, turning Christ's heavenly kingdom into an earthly, and the spiritual into a carnal, and the kingdom of Grace, into a kingdom of terrene glory, and the Church militant into a Church malignant and triumphant (as before is noted) and the true Catholic Church which we believe to consist of all the Elect only, Christ's living members) into a new Catholic visible Church of all nominal Christians, tag and rag, Papists and others: and in a word, the Church of Christ into the Church and synagogue of Antichrist. Is not here then a fearful apostasy, and falling from Christ? Time calls me off, and therefore I must be very brief. I will add therefore but one place more for the proof of this, That Prelacy is apostasy from Christ. It is in 1 Io. 2. 18. Little children, it is the last time, and as ye have heard that Antichrist shall come, even now are there many Antichrists, whereby we know that it is the last time. They went out from us; but they were not of us: for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest, that they were not all of us. lo, here is an apostasy, and it is of certain Antichrists, that were then sprung up, even many Antichrists. But how doth this concern our Prelates? Let us look but a little lower, and as before we found them wrapped in the swaddling Clouts of the Mystery of Iniquity: So here we shall behold them in the very robes of Antichrist. For v. 22. Who is a liar, but he that denyeth, that Jesus is the Christ: He is Antichrist, &c. Now what is it to deny Jesus to be the Christ? Surely we must so take these words, as we hold the analogy of faith, and so, as they cross not the Mystery of Iniquity, which we showed before to be a denying of Christ, under a colour of confessing him. Now then there is a twofold denial of Christ: one in words, another in works. So the Apostle saith of such, 
* Tit. 2. 16.  They porfesse that they know God, but in works they deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. So as there is a denial of Christ in deeds. But what it is to deny, that Jesus is the Christ? This is a point indeed very considerable. To deny that Jesus is the Christ, is to deny, that Jesus is the Auointed King Priest and Prophet; So, as never any were anointed, to all these 3 Offices. And therefore Christ was said to be 
‡ Psal. 45.  anointed above his fellows. And for that cause he is called here, o' Kristòs, The Anointed. Now then to deny that Jesus is the Christ, is to deny, that Jesus is the only King, the only High Priest, and the only Prophet of his Church. But (to apply this) doth the Pope, and so our Prelates, deny that Jesus is thus the Christ? Yes, they do. First, for the Pope, it is manifest, that he denies Jesus to be the only King of his Church: because himself takes upon him to be King over the Church, sitting as God in the Temple of God, showing himself, that he is God; as before is showed. Secondly, he not only sets up other High-Priests in heaven, as whom he makes Mediators of Intercession: and so he denies Christ's High priesthood in heaven, whose Office alone it is to make Intercession within the veil, as was typed by the High Priest, Heb. 9 but the Pope also makes himself the High Priest on Earth, in forgiving of Sins, and in Sacrificing and offering up a Breaden Christ for a propitiatory Sacrifice, wherein also every mass-house usurps Christ's Priesthood on the cross. And Thirdly, he denyeth Jesus to be the only Prophet to teach his Church, taking upon him to be the Sole Oracle, and unerring judge in matters of Faith. These might be enlarged, but I hasten. And a word in things so clear, is sufficient. Now for our Prelates: Do not they too deny, that Jesus is the Christ? do not they deny him to be the only King of his Church, by their usurping of his throne and dominion over the Consciences of God's people in matters of faith and Religion, by imposing their manifold Canons, and Ceremonies, as before is showed? And Secondly, do they not deny, that Jesus is the only High Priest, while themselves with the Pope, and their false Priesthood, take upon them to forgive Sins? Yea and do they not labour to come home to Rome, in setting up their Altars, with their Priests, which must needs have a suitable Sacrifice, some Host: so as thereby Christ is denied to be the only High Priest, who offered up himself on the cross once for all? Thirdly, and Lastly, do they not deny Jesus to be the only Prophet of his Church, while themselves usurp the Office of being judges of the Scripture, and of the Controversies of Faith, making their Dictates to be received for Doctrines, and their determinations (though in things erroneous in the Faith) to bind all men to peace and obedience? Which being so: the Conclusion is, that as the Pope is the grand Antichrist, so Prelates are so many Antichrists. For (saith the Apostle) Who is a liar, but he that denyeth, that Jesus is the Christ? He is Antichrist. And thus we see, how these hypocrites, who are so Superstitiously and Idolatrously devout in their worshipping of the Name JESUS, prove themselves notorions. Antichrists, in denying Jesus to be the Christ, to be the only King, Priest and Prophet of his Church.   

CHAP. ix..  
Wherein the Prelates usual Allegations out of the Scriptures, by them perverted, or other by them pretended, are answered.  
AS there hath been no heresy, nor heretic, so gross, but he could allege some Scripture or other for the maintenance of his heresy, if his own carnal sense might be the Intepreter and judge: So our Prelates, though their pretended Title of jurisdiction be in some clear Scriptures so expressly condemned both by Christ and his Apostles (as hath been showed) as were sufficient to confound them, and put them to perpetual silence: yet they leave no Stone unturned, under which they might find but some worm for a bait to deceive the Simple Fish. And therefore where they find but the least shadow, or appearance or resemblance, which may present to their fancy and imagination some airy Image of their hierarchy, that they set up for all men to adore. Now let us see what starting holes they find out for themselves in the holy Scripture. First, they allege those Postscripts in the end of Paul's Second Epistle to Timothy, and of that to Titus: where in the one, Timothy is said to be first Bishop of Ephesus: and in the other, Titus first Bishop of the Church of the Cretians. These (say they) were Diocesan Bishops, ordained by the Apostle. And here (say they) we have Scripture for it. Ergo we Bishops have our Authority Iure Divino To both which places, I answer: First, That those two Postscripts are no part of canonical Scripture, or of the holy Text. For (as the learned Beza hath well observed) they were not found in the most ancient Greek Copies: nor yet in the vulgar Latin Translation, no not to this day. These were additions of some Monks, that were made some hundred years after the Apostles. So as in Ieromes time they were not extant, as the Translation that goes in his Name can testify, which hath no such Postscrips. Secondy, our former and ancienter English Translations, though they have those Postscripts, yet they are put in a small character, different from that of the Text, that all men may take notice they are no part of the Text. Although our All-Innovating Prelates of late, have in the newer Impressions enlarged their Phylacteries, in putting those Postscripts in the same full character with that of the Text, that the Simple might believe they are canonical Scripture. Thirdly, Timothy and Titus, are nowhere in Scripture called Bishops. Fourthly, Suppose they were such Bishops, as the Scriptures approve of, as before is showed: doth it therefore follow, that they were Diocesan Bishops, Lording over the Presbyters, as our Lord Prelates do? Let them show us that. But fiftly, it is clear by Scripture, that Timothy and Titus were neither diocesan Bishops; nor yet Bishops of a particular Congregation, such as the Scripture commends unto us. Not Diocesan Bishops: for first, as yet there was no distribution of Diocese; that came in afterward. And secondly, they were not tied to any Residence either Diocesan, or parochial. And neither as yet was the Church divided into Parishes. Now the reason why Timothy and Titus were no such Bishops, is, because they were 
* 2 Tim. 4. 5.  evangelists, whose Office was to attend upon the Apostles, and to be sent by them now to one Church, now to another, and that in remote Countries, and far distant one from another, where they stayed no longer, than the Apostles thought expedient, having occasion to employ them in other places; as we may read Tit. 1. 5. and 3. 12. Phil. 2. 19 23. 2 Cor. 8. 16. 18, 19 and 12. 17, 18. Col. 4. 7, 8: 1 Thess. 3. 2. 5 and in sundry other places. So as Timothy and Titus, and other evangelists, their Office was to water those Churches, which the Apostles had planted, to comfort, confirm, establish the hearts of Christians newly converted to the faith of Christ. So as if Timothy and Titus had been Bishops, either Diocesan, or parochial, than the Apostle in sending them to this and that country, to this and that Church in far distant Countries, should have been an Author of nonresidence, a thing much controverted in the 
‡ Hist. Concil.  council of Trent, and the best learned did maintain, that Residence of Bishops was de jure divino. They were no Bishops therefore, but evangelists. And thus the Scripture itself shows plainly, that those foresaid Postscripts are mere forgeries, and counterfeit stuff; though our Prelates are glad of any shred to patch up their pied Motley Coat withal.  
But they allege again for themselves, that Titus was left in Crect to ordain Bishops in every City. Ergo, Ordination of Ministers belongs properly and solely to Bishops. For answer: Is this a good Argument: Titus Ordained Ministers in Crect: Ergo Ordination of Ministers pertains to the Office of every Diocesan Bishop? But they must bring better proof, that Titus was a Diocesan Bishop: otherwise, I deny their Argument. Secondly, Suppose, that Titus did alone ordain: yet this being a case of necessity, and in the infancy of the Church, is it therefore to be made a general Rule? Thirdly, if they were Diocesan Bishops, whom Titus ordained in every City in Creta, than Titus was an Archbishop at least, and no small one neither, for there being an hundred Cities in Crect, called therefore e katómpolis, the hundred-City-Ile. But for Archbishops our Arch-prelate confesseth they are not Iure Divino. Or else, for Titus to ordain such Bishops, as the Prelate meaneth he could according to ancient Canons of counsels, have had 2 or 3 other Bishops joined with him. But if they had been Bishops, whom he is said to ordain, the word should rather have been teleiosai, or so to Consecrate, then katastesai, to ordain: because a Diocesan Bishop is not ordained, but consecrated, as they call it; so as such a Bishop is not an Order, or Calling, as before is showed. But to shut up this: Titus was no Bishop, and therefore our prelate's Argument from Titus his Ordaining of Ministers, is too weak a foundation, to build their high towering hierarchy upon.  
Again, they allege the power that Timothy and Titus had to Censure delinquents: Ergo Prelates Courts are Iure Divino. This Argument is like the former, and concludes nothing for them. Nor had Timothy and Titus their Courts and Consistories, their Apparitors, and Pursuivants, their dumb Priests to sit in Court to Excommunicate, and the like. Nor were their Censures like to those of our Prelates; as before we have showed about Excommunication, either for the matter, or manner, or end.  
But Titus had a Commission tà leíponta, epidiorthosai, to set in order the things that are wanting. What then? Ergo it is an Office of Prelates to set the Church in Order, by adding such Ceremenies or Canons, as are wanting. As the Prelate saith in his said book, that he had 
* Epist. Dedi. pag. 20.  taken all that pains for an Orderly Settlement in the Church. But besides the reasons aforesaid, that Titus was no Diocesan Bishop, for our Prelates to make their pattern by: they must consider, that the full latitude of the sense of epidiorthosai (which our English turns, to set in Order,) is, to set those things in Order, or in integrum restituere, to restore and reduce them to their former estate, wherein at the first they were ordered. Now Titus had received his rule from the Apostle for whatsoever he was to set in Order, which rule comprehended such things as were wanting. The Apostle left it not to Titus to do what he would, but o's ego soi dietaxamen, as I had appointed thee. Thus nothing will frame well, the Scripture will not speak one good word for our Prelates.  
But they take their wings, and fly to the Revelation, where the Bishops are called Angels, as Rev. 1. 20. and 2. 1, &c. The Angel of the Church of Ephesus (say they) was the Bishop, to wit, the Diocesan Bishop. But first they must prove that Ephesus had a Diocesan Bishop. before they can conclude he was that Angel. For every Angel is not a Diocesan Bishop. For than All Ministers being called Angels, because God's Messengers, should be Diocesan Bishops, which our Prelates cry out against: but if they be false Ministers, or counterfeit Bishops, though they be Angels, yet they are of those Angels of darkness, which transform themselves into Angels of light, 
2 Cor. 11. 13. 14.  as the Apostle speaks, and which we mentioned before. But hath Ephesus now gotten a Diocesan Bishop? What's then become of all those Bishops of Ephesus, whom the Apostle called together, Act.. 20. 17. 28? Of which we spoke before. How come they now all to be moulded up into one Angel, one Diocesan Bishop? But our Prelates must bring us better proof from Scripture, than so, for their Diocesan Bishop, unless they will have him some Angel dropped from the clouds. 
Gal. 1.  And (saith the Apostle) if an Angel from heaven preach otherwise, than what the Scripture teacheth, let him be accursed.  
But they imagine this Angel is the Diocesan Lord Bishop, because he stands single, and alone, To the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, not To the Angels, as many. But do they not know, that it is familiar with the Scripture to use the singular number for the plural? Doth not every one of the ten commandments run thus, Thou shalt not, &c. when every mother's son is meant? And why not so here? Nay it is so here: for though he write as to one, v. 1. yet v. 7. he concludes the Epistle thus, He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches. And such is the style and manner of every one of those 7. Epistles to the seven Churches: so as under one is meant every one, yea all the Churches. Now will our Prelates hence conclude, that because an Angel herd is named, and that which is written particularly to one, concerneth all the Churches: that therefore this Angel was the Diocesan Bishop? Surely then, he must be an Archbishop, as comprehending all the Churches. And so also must every one of the other Angels of the Churches: which would make a confusion. But if the Prelates were not selfe-blinded, they might discern the reason, why the Holy-Ghost puts an Angel for many. For thus it holds proportion with the Vision showed to John, Chap. 1. 12. 20. This Vision of the Seven stars, and Seven Candlesticks, and Seven Angels, and Seven Churches, is called a Mystery. And a Mystery is a Secret, which comprehends more, than is expressed. And so here, when one Angel is named, we are to understand all the Angels of that Church, to whom, in the name of one, the Epistle is written: nor only to all the Angels, but to the Churches, under the name of one Angel. So as in one are comprehended many, for it is a Mystery: yet one is mentioned (Chap. 2. 1.) because (I say) it holds proportion with the vision. Again, if by the Angel here, they would have to be understood a Diocesan Bishop, than they must prove, that this Diocesan hath a lawful Calling, as Sent of God. Otherwise he is no Angel, that is, no Messenger, no Angel sent of God. Or if they say, This Angel was sent of God, let them prove him to be a Diocesan Bishop. And thus they are brought into a Circle, and cannot find the way out.  
But they allege again, That one here notes unity, which cannot be without a Diocesan Bishop. And therefore a Diocesan Bishop was set up for that end, to be a Head of unity, for the conservation of Order and Peace, in Schismatis remedium, for a remedy of schism. Insomuch as our Arch-prelate (as is before noted) holds a necessity of one Ordine Primus, for the unity and peace of his Catholic Church. Now for answer briefly (this being partly touched before) true it is, that one here is a mystical note of unity, so as in the Angel of the Church of Ephesus, is comprehended the whole Church of Ephesus, both Ministers and People. But one here doth not signify one Diocesan Bishop. Neither is one Diocesan Bishop in a Diocese, nor one Metropolitan in a Province or kingdom, nor one Ordine Primus in the whole Catholic Church, of necessity to preserve unity in the Church. 'Tis true indeed, that the Prelates new catholic-church, which is prelatical, may need such a Head as one Ordine Primus, to preserve it in unity and peace: this being also very useful for the enlarging of the Tower of Babel, for which the Prelate hath so laboured for Peace in the Church of England under the Headship of his Primacy: so as had he none to oppose or contradict his wicked practices, for the setting up of Popery, but all did quietly submit and conform to his Canon, his Babylon would go up apace, and prosper: even as 
* Gen. 11.  when the old world was all of one language, the Tower of Babel went up a main, till God confounded their work in the division of tongues: but the true Catholic Church of Jesus Christ hath one Bishop of there souls, which is Christ, who is that Ordine Primus, that 
‡ Ephes. ●. 15, 16.  unites the whole body, every joint, and every member, that is, not only every particular believer, but every particular Christian Congregation is knit to the whole, in and under that one Head And so this Body groweth, and this building goeth up, notwithstanding all the mouths of contradiction, and of malicious Sandballets, that seek to hinder it. Whereas it is not so with the building of Babel. For one small breath of the mouth of God in his word, breathed by one poor Minister, is able to blast the building; and therefore the builders cry out against such Fellows, as troublers of the State, and movers of Sedition. And they cannot be in quiet, nor their building go up, until such make-bates be silenced, or made our of the way. And therefore they labour with the Prince (when themselves want power and Law) to do with such as Constantine did with Athanasius. 
Socrat. Hist. Eccl. lib. 1. c. 35.  Athanasius was the only man, that refused to hold Communion with a sort of Arian Bishops; which caused a great gap in that unity and peace in the Church, which Constantine so much desired. Well, what's the remedy? He thereupon was easily moved to send Athanasius away into banishment, and then he thought all would be quiet and in peace. But by the way, Truth must be looked unto in the first place: otherwise what peace? For that a false peace, and the moeher of farther discord, for the which truth is lost. And even our Prelate himself in his said book doth often harp upon these two strings together, Truth and Peace: a good harmony, were they rightly meant, and that his Truth were not made of a wolves gut, which will never agree with a string made of a sheep's gut, as he pretends his Peace to be. But this by the way. And whereas they allege the prelacy to be a remedy of schism (hear o heavens, and harken o earth) is not the Prelacy the grand schismatic? I mean, not only in being the most busy and usual makebate in all Civil States, dividing Prince and People, but in setting up a new and false Catholic Church, altogether separate from, and holding no communion with, yea excluding all Reformed Churches not prelatical, as no members of the Catholic (as indeed they be not of the false Catholic) all prelacy drawing to one Head of the Papacy, and that by a necessity of one Ordine Primus; as before is noted.  
But to draw to a Conclusion. The last Allegation which I note they make, is, that S. Mark was Bishop of Alexandria. Ergo episcopal jurisdiction, is an apostolical Tradition, and so jure divino. And for this they allege the Testimony of Jerome where he saith, 
Confer pa. 176.  At Alexandria from Mark the Evangelist, the Presbyters always choosing one from among them, and placing him in a more eminent degree, called him Bishop. Whereupon the Prelate thus infers. So even according to S. Jerome, Bishops had a very ancient and honourable descent in the Church from St. Mark the evangelist: and this (saith Jerome,) was a Tradition Apostolic. So the Prelate. But first for Jerome, we noted his words before of such Bishops, saying, They were set up by human presumption, and not by divine Institution, and consequently not by Apostolic Tradition. For Apostolic Tradition is far from humane presumption; So as it is human presumption to make that Apostolic Tradition. And for S. Mark, 
* Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 2. c. 15  ecclesiastical Story tells us, that Mark was the first, that preached the gospel (which also he writ) at Alexandria. But the Story saith not, that Mark was Bishop of Alexandria. And the Prelate must mark, that he was an evangelist (as also Jereme saith) for he wrote the Gospel. And the History saith, he was 
‡ Ibid, c. 14.  a follower of Peter the Apostle. Which if true, it makes it more probable, that it was that Babylon in Egypt, whence Peter wrote his Epistle, where he saith, The Church that is at Babylon saluteth you, and so doth Marcus my Son: then that Peter was then at Rome, which the Papists (to make Peter to have been at Rome) are content should be that Babylon, from whence he writ. And if they will needs have it so, let them have it, with the whore of Babylon to boot. But this by the way. But be it, that Mark was at Alexandria, he was there only as an evangelist, and to do the Office of an evangelist, of which we have Spoken before: Bishop he was not, as the Prelates would have him; for that we have already proved to be in their sense condemned both by Christ, and by his Apostles, and therefore is neither an Institution of Christ, nor a Tradition Apostolic. And therefore what ever the Presbyters at Alexandria began to practise after Mark the evangelist, in choosing and exalting one over them, whom they called a Bishop, whence our Prelates derive their Ancieut and Honourable descent: sure we are, they can never prove, that ever either any Apostle delivered this to mark, or mark from the Apostles to the Presbyters, to make it a Tradition Apostolic. Yea this is a sure and infallible Rule in Divinity, That whatever the Apostles expressly set down in their Sacred writing, they never delivered the contrary by word of mouth. As the Apostle writes to the Corinthians, saying 
‡ Ibid, c. 14.  As God is true, our word towards you, was not yea and any. Now (as we have sufficiently proved before) the Apostles, as Christ their Masters forbade them) forbid Prelacy to others, they exercised it not themselves, they disclaimed dominion over the saith of Christians, they brand it for Antichristian: therefore prelatical jurisdiction is no Apostolic Tradition: and so no way of divine Institution. And thus the Truth and Title agreeing together, I end, as I began, Lord Bishops, are none of the LORDS Bishops.  
FINIS.   

GOOD council FOR THE PRESENT STATE OF ENGLAND.  
I Call that Counsel only good, which God himself giveth in his Word: and such is this Counsel, which is here given, as being taken from the mouth of God speaking in his Word. 'Tis a dangerous thing, and impious too, for Men to neglect God's council, and follow their own. This is a sign of a People given up of God: As the Lord saith, 
* Psal. 81. 1●. 12.  My people would not harken to my voice, and Israel would none of me: So I gave them up unto their own hearts lust, and they walked in their own Counsels. And what's the issue of such Counsels? David tells us, and that with an imprecasion, 
‡ Psal. 5. 10.  Destroy thou them, o God, let them fall by their own counsels. And this is meant of such counsels especially, as are taken not only without the Lord, but against the Lord. Of which David also saith, 
‡ Psal. 2. 1, 2, 3, 4.  Why do the Heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The Kings of the earth set themselves, and the Rulers take council together against the Lord, and against his Christ: Saying, Let us break their bonds asunder, and cast away their cords from us. And what followeth? He that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh, the Lord shall have them in derision. Then shall he speak unto them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure. For God hath set his King, even the Lord Jesus Christ, upon his holy hill of Zion. This King hath all power in heaven and in earth given into his hand. And he hath, as a golden sceptre sweetly to govern and protect his own people, so an Iron Rod to break in pieces his enemies, whereupon the Kingly Prophet concludes thus, Be wise now therefore o ye Kings, be instructed ye judges of the earth: Serve the Lord in fear and trembling: kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. And what doth more kindle God's wrath against a State, or Nation, then to Slight and Scorn his counsels, and with those Giants of old to consult, and confederate, and even make war against the Lord and his Christ?  
And now, o England, thou art making a great preparation for war. But of whom hast thou taken council? Of the Lord? From his mouth? Hast thou consulted his Oracle, his Word? If not, what ever other council thou takest, or followest, it is but such, whereof David thus speaks, 
* ● Psal. 33. 10, 11.  The Lord bringeth the council of the Heathen to nought, be maketh the devices of the people of none effect, and casteth out the Counsels of Princes. The council of the Lord standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations. And 
‡ v. 16, 17.  There is no King saved by the multitude of an Host, a mighty man is not delivered by much strength. An Horse is a vain thing for safety, neither shall be deliver any by his great strength. Solomon saith, By wise council thou shalt make thy war. And no council can be wise, which is not taken of God, and much less, what is taken of enemies against God.  
Of whom then dost thou take council for thy Warre? hear, o England, examine thyself. I know the council of thy heart (as Solomon saith is as 
‡ Pro. 20. 5.  deep waters, into the bottom whereof a vulgar eye cannot elsily pierce. But yet a man of understanding will draw it out. But if thou wilt not discover who is thy counsellor, certainly thy intended actions will bewray and publish to the world.  
And therefore in the Second place, consider the Cause of thy war, that it be just. I do not mean made seemingly just by false colours, and pretences, but that it be really and truly just before God an Men, Otherwise, thou hast two grand Causes of fear, that the issue shall not be prosperous; to wit, not takiug council first of God for thy war: secondly, not undertaking it upon a just Cause or quarrel.  
But (to come a little nearer home to the point) is the Cause such, as it will bear any Consultation, or Communion with God. So as thou mayst with a good heart and Conscience seek unto God, to maintain thy Cause? And for what ever Cause thou indendest thy war, or against whom, surely the Cause being public, and so concerning the whole Land, such a seeking of God is required, as is solemn, public, and universal. And we are sure, that as yet, o England, thou hast not sought God, for the good Speed of this thy great and warlike preparation And then, what good issue canst thou expect for?  
But thou wilt say, how shall I seek Counsel and help of God? For this, I will propound but one example. The whole Tribe of Benjamin stood up in maintenance of a most wicked and prodigious fact, as that towards the Levites Wife. He sent her being dead in 12 pieces to all the Tribes of Israel: who abhorring such a Fact, first sent to their Brethren the Benjamites to punish the Malefactors. They refused. Whereupon all the Tribes assembled. And first they ask Counsel of the Lord which of the Tribes, shall go up first against Benjamin. He Answers, Iudah And though the Cause was just, and God counselled them, yet they were expulsed with the loss of 22 thousand men. They consult God the Second time; and that with weeping before the Lord until even: the Lord answers them, go up, yet this time also they were beaten and lost 18 thousand men. Strange? Well they inquire of the Lord the third time, but in a better manner than before: for all the People of Israel assemble to the House of God, weeping and fasting the whole day until even, and offered burnt offerings, and peace offerings before the Lord; and then asking the Lord, shall I yet again go to battle against Benjamin, or shall I cease. The Lord answers them the third time, go up, for to morrow I will deliver them into thy hand. Whence it is to be noted, that till this Third time, that they make their peace with God by burnt-offerings, and peace-offerings, God doth not give them an answer of peace, and prosperous success. Hence then, o England; take thy pattern of seeking God, and asking Counsel of Him. First, do not first resolve with thyself to fight, and then go ask of God, not, whether thou shalt fight, or no, but only, who shall go up first. For than thou mayst speed, as they did. Secondly, think it not sufficient to pour forth tears of worldly sorrow for thy discomfiture, and thereupon resolve to renew the battle, for which also, though they had an answer of God for it, yet it was without any Promise of good success. But Thirdly, a general Fast must be Proclaimed over the Land, and a solemn Day must be kept in offering up the burnt offerings of an humble and contrite heart, and peace offerings of reconciliation with God through faith in Christ, joined with a thorough Reformation of thy notorious Sins and transgressions, wherewith the whole Land is burdened and defiled. Then, then (I say) and not before (Always provided the Cause of war be known to be just, as that of the Israelites was against the Benjamites their Brethren) mayst thou with a good Conscience and sure confidence in God make thy war.  
But what Sins are those, which thou must reform? In brief, thou must (O England) call in those wicked and ungodly books, Orders, Edicts, Declarations, whereby the Doctrines of Grace have been suppressed, the Sanctification of the Sabbath cried down, Ministers persecuted, and put out of their places, much innocent blood hath been shed, especially of those 3 banished Close Prisoners; and to sum up all in one head-sin, to cast out those, who are the main Instruments and movers of all these and other outrages in the Land, to wit, the Prelates, who (as the limbs of Antichrist, and so Christ's adversaries) do of late especially challenge their Lordly Jurisdiction from Christ alone, 
* Mat. 20. 25. Mark. 10. 42. Luk. 22. 25.  which notwithstanding he hath expressly forbidden as heathenish, and tyrennicall: and which his 
‡ 2 Thess. 2. 4. 7. & 3 loh. 9, 10.  Apostles branded for Antichristian, and the Mystery of Iniquity. So as till these usurpers of Christ's Throne, be cast out, with all their Baggage and Trumpery of their Cermonies and will-worship, be sure, o England, thou canst not look to prosper in any thy undertakings, be they never so just: for in maintaining thy Prelates, thou maintainest open war against Christ, and his kingdom, and (hadst thou eyes to see it) against thine own kingdom too, and the peace and prosperity thereof.  
But it will be alleged that thy Reverend prelates hate a public Fast, as being puritanical, and consequently any such Reformation, as aforesaid, as being all puritanical: that their Order is most Christian, and consonant to Civil Government, and most agreeable with the Monarchy; and the like. And therefore, that thou art bound to defend them, yea though it be by making open war against all those, that do withstand their Hiearchy. If this be thy resolution, o England, then know this for a certainty that thou canst not long stand: seeing thy so maintaining of that Antichristian Tyranny is to wage open war against Jesus Christ, the only King of his Church. And therefore if this be the cause and end of thy warlike preparations, be sure thou shalt not prosper in why way how art thou so blind, as not to se, how thy prosperity must of necessity be thy ruin. For as Christ saith, 
* Mat. 12. 25.  A kingdom divided against itself cannot stand. And so if the island which consists of two kingdoms under one King be divided against itself, and the one kingdom destroy the other, is it not as with the body when the right hand cuts off the left? And shalt not thou, o England, be hereby exposed to thy false friends, and deadly enemies without, who could not wish a better opportunity for the effecting of their long wished desire, then to see this goodly island to imbrue her hands in her own bowels and blood? And therefore, if thou hast any such design o England, who could, who would counsel and instigate thee unto it, but the Spirit of Jezebel of Rome, possessing thy prelates, who as those 
‡ 1 King. 22.  false Prophets, bid thee to go up against Ramoth Gilead, and prosper.  
But it will be pretended, they are rebels whom thou wilt war against. Wherein rebels? For casting our Christ's enemies, those Antichristian usurpers the Prelates? Indeed thus thou didst deal with those 3 above said, as Seditious Persons, because they convinced the Prelates of their usurped title of jurisdiction from Christ, wherein they did not in the least point transgress, or yet so much as trench upon any of thy Laws, but defended them against the Prelates. And if in so doing any shall be accounted of thee to be rebels, certainly they which do it not, are neither good Christians, nor good Subjects. But if indeed thou wilt war against any such, as rebels, let the Case first be tried in a fair and judicial way, a better than which cannot be, than the present Parliament. And because the Prelates are Parties, let them be excluded out of the Court, till the matter be decided. For no Reason, that Parties should sit as Judges, as the Prelates did in the Censuring of those former three, though they excepted against them in open Court. And if indeed by such a fair trial any shall be found judicially to be rebels against their King, then make war against them, and spare not, and I could wish to be the foremost in the fight. But if they only stand to defend their ancient Rights and Liberties and those good Laws of the Land, which as the Ligatures do bind, unite, and fasten the Head and Body, the King and his Subjects together: and which both Prince and People are bound by mutual Covenant, and Sacred Oath to maintain, let the Parliament determine, whether that be Rebellion, or no.  
Which, till it be determined, let me crave thy patience, o England, in a few words; and harken to the Counsel, that I shall give thee in God's own Name and words. And because the present Parliament is the Representative Body of the whole State of the Land, let me first address my Speech to it, now Assembled in both the Houses. Now where God's word saith, 
* Pro. 24. 6.  By wise Counsel thou shalt make thy war: he immediately addeth, And in a multitude of councillors there is Safety. And you, most Noble Senate, are a Multitude of councillors, whose wisdom and council is requisite at this time for the making of war, or not, and much more, for the making of war against your Brethren, and in the very bowels of the Land. Which war if it be for the prelate's Hierarchy, let me say, as he did, 
‡ Iudg. 6. 31.  If Baal be a God, let him plead for himself. For otherwise, the making of such a war cannot be for safety: and therefore I hope a multitude of such counsellors will never give their consent, much less their Counsel for such a war. Yea because as the wise Heathen Statesman and Orator said, Iniquissima pax justissimo Bello anteponenda est: even an unequal Peace is to be preferred before a just war: how much more is a most just and Christian Peace to be preferred before a most unjust and Antichrrstian war; Such as is undertaken for the maintenance of the Hierarhy, which is merely Antichristian. And miserable are those warriors, that fight for the Beasts kingdom, and for the Dragon against the lamb, Jesus Christ. And therefore to prevent this, harken to Christ's words, Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the Children of God. And if any be charged of Rebellion, if it be found so by you, let the Civil Sword of Justice be drawn, and not the bloody Sword of war, by which the innocent may as soon suffer, as the nocent. And for the better making of way for Peace: let the make-bates be removed, those Ackans of Israel, the troublers and incendiaries of all Estates both Civil and Christian. And who are those but the Prelates? Solomon saith, 
‡ Iudg. 6. 31.  Take away the wicked from before the King, and his throne shall be established in righteousness. This he compares there (v. 4.) to the dross purged away from the silver; which is not done, but by the fire. So this separation of these wicked from the King cannot be, but by a strong and a holy zeal. And till this separation be the King's throne cannot be established in righteousness. And as (Pro. 26. 20.) where no wood is, there the fire goeth out: So where there is no Tale-bearer, the strife ceaseth. And surely if these Sycophants and earwigs were removed, we should neither hear of war between Prince and People, nor fear any Invasion of foreign Power.  
But the Prelates (will some say) are by the Laws of the Land authorised, and so incorporated into the Body of the State: So as 't is no easy matter to make this Separation. 'Tis true indeed, that an old inbred malignant him our, or incorporated wen (as Iunius calls the popedom, and hierarchy) is not easily removed from the Body. But to your comfort most Noble physicians) the wen hath of its own accord started out of his place, So as it is but closing it up, that it return not. For of late the Prelates have by their very claim of holding their jurisdiction from Christ, fallen off from, and disclaimed their dependence upon either King's Prerogative, or Law. And how severely have they in their Courts of late Censured those, that have withstood this their usurped Title, as Dr. Bastwick, Mr. Burton, Mr. Pryn. Yea and but the other day, and within the very smell of the approaching Parliament, was not a Learned Reader in the Law in the Temple, now a member of the Parliament, inhibited and suspended from his Reading, because he undertook to prove, that prelatical jurisdiction was not Iure Divino, by Divine Authority? So as now they having withdrawn themselves, and flown off from under the protection of royal Prerogative, and Law, and having no one Evidence in Scripture for this their Title, which they are able to produce: they lie naked and exposed to this present Parliament, quite to cashier and abandon them, and send them with all their pomp, Pride, Tyranny, and Antichristian Titles to Rome, from whence, with the great Antichrist, they had their first Rise and original. Therefore in God's Name cast them out, as notorious Innovators, and enemies of all Laws of God and Man; for as that 
* 2 Thess. 2●  o' anomos, that lawless one, they will be tied to none, but tramble upon all. How have they trampled on the sanctification of the Sabbath, and the morrality of the 4th commandment, polluting it with their foul paws? How have they dared the Courts of Civil Justice, that no Prohibitions can be obtained for the most innocent Causes, to fetch them off the hooks of their High Commission? How have they trampled upon God's word, and all the Doctrines of Grace, utterly prohibiting them to be preached, without which Doctrines there can be no true Preaching? How do they trample upon all godly Ministers and People, hunting them out of every hole, with their Beagles, So as what a kind of Convocation is now in being, and what Canons they will make, if they be suffered judge you, especially when they have such a lawless Pope over them, as now they have. Out with them therefore, out of hand.  
But some will say, they are grown potent in Court, and they have a strong Faction and Party, so as they are become a Noli me tangere: and no sooner shall the Parliament begin to meddle with them, but they will procure a hand to knock them off and break up all.  
Is it so? Will they do thus? It is not unlikely, because they have been such expert practisioners in such kind of feats. For all the world shall be set in a flame and combustion, rather than one spark shall cindge their Coat. And if so, what then? Surely then, woe to thee, o England, never look for Parliament more, but prepare thy neck for the prelate's Iron yoke. Woe to thee, o Scotland, in case thy Prelates return by a forcible re-entry, which shall be my earnest Prayer, they may never do. Nay I hope, for all their power and pride, their Kigdom is near at an end in this Hand. For Christ hath stirred up all the good people's hearts against them, and their Tyranny. And now, most Noble Senate, Christ requires, your helping hand, and unanimous votes to cast them out. Which to effect, first let a league be renewed between Christ and this kingdom, by humiliation, by Reformation, by purgation of the Land from all Romish Altars, Images, and other Superstitions in Churches, and from all manner of human Inventions and Ceremonies whatsoever to bind the Conscience of any man in the service and worship of our God. Then Secondly (the Prelates being cashiered) stand close to the King, and let him know and feel the boundless affections of his People, in their free and liberal Contributions, for the necessary maintenance of the State of the kingdom. For nothing can separate Prince and people's affections, but Prelates.  
But for conclusion abruptly, if their malice and power prevail so far, as to cause an untimely and unhappy beeaking up of this Parliament, as formerly they have done, which hath been and is the only cause of all the Calamities of the Land, which now is drawing on to utter ruin and confusion, if not at this time through God's mercy, by the means of this present Parliament prevented: now or never take heart and courage unanimously to do your utmost for the preserving both of your King and country. And therefore before you be dissolved, if you cannot attain to the establishing of so many Acts, yet at least let these particular Protests be left recorded for perpetual memory, and a Testimony to all the world, to Angels and Men, of your zeal for God, of your loyalty to your King, and of your love to your country.  
First, Protest against the Hierarchy, as an Antichristian Tyranny over the souls, Bodies, and Estates of all the King's Subjects, and therefore ought to be rooted out, and not suffered in any Christian Church, or Common weal.  
Secondly, and consequently, Protest against all Altars, Images, and such like Popish Idolatrous relics, utterly unlawful to be erected in any true Christian Church.  
Thirdly, Protest against all human Rites and Ceremonies whatsoever imposed upon men's Consciences in the worship of God, as being all of them Antichristian, bringing into bondage men's souls, which Christ hath redeemed with his precious blood, who is the only Lord of the Conscience, and the only lawgiver to his Church for all matters of Faith, and of the worship of God.  
Fourthly, Protest against all such general Taxes laid upon the Subjects, as whereby both their ancient Liberties, and the fundamental Laws of the kingdom are overthrown, and so vindicate the Honour both of the King, and of this noble kingdom, that it may not be recorded to Posterity for a State of Tyranny and Slavery.  
Fiftly, and consequently, Protest against all those wicked judges, which have in such wise declared their opinions for intolerable Taxes expressly contrary to the Laws and Liberties of the kingdom, as thereby they have given occasion for the betraying of all, and the bringing of the whole Land under perpetual Slavery.  
Sixtly, Protest against that prelatical Declaration set forth in the King's Name before the 39 Articles, wherein those Articles of the Dostrines of Grace, are made void, and so all preaching of them suppressed.  
Seventhly, Protest against that book for Sports on the Lord's days, as whereby both the fourth commandment, and the fifth are most desperately overthrown: as also against all those books that have been set forth for the maintaining of such profanation, as whereby God is greatly dishonoured, and his wrath provoked even to the Spewing out of such a Nation out of his mouth.  
Eightly, Protest against all that prelatical Tyranny in oppressing the preaching of God's Word on the Lord's days in the afternoon, and other days in the week, and their Antichristian persecuting and putting out of all godly and painful Ministers, such as will not conform to their lawless Ordinances.  
Ninthly, Protest against that most terrible and odious shedding of the innocont blood of those 3 forementioned, now perpetual Exiles and close Prisoners, even their very Wives most lawlessly detained from them, with all their other severe punishments, one of them being a Minister, who in discharge of his duty first preached in his own Church, and then published his Sermons in Print against the Prelates notorious practices and Popish Innovations, for which he underwent punishments so great, so many, as no Age, no Christian State can parallel; so as their blood doth incessantly cry against this whole Land, as guilty thereof (though shed only by the prelate's instigation as aforesaid) until it be purged.  
Tenthly, Protest against that accursed book, Relation of a Conference, &c. published in Print, and Dedicated to the King, by the now Prelate of Canterbury, wherein he belies, and so blasphemes God, Christ, the Holy Ghost, the holy Scriptures, the Church of England, in saying it is one and the Same with that of Rome, of the same Faith and Religion with that Whore of Babylon, and many such like impious assertions, the whole book professedly tending to reconcile England and Rome, and so to bring the whole Land back again to Popery.  
Eleventhly, If this great and Warlike preparation be by the Prelates diabolical Instigation (as by no other it can be, except by the Pope and his jesuiter, and his Nuncio's Negotiation have also a hand in it) to go against the Scots, and if the cause shall be found to be no other, but that they have abandoned, and Remaunded to Rome all their Prelates, as the grand Enemies of Christ, and his kingdom, and of the peaceable and prosperous estate of the realm, and consequently of the King's Crown and Dignity; and that they stand for the maintenance of their just Laws and Liberties, the continuance whereof is the King's honour, and the establishment of his throne: If (I say) no other cause can justly be alleged, and yet they shall be invaded, as rebels: Protest against all aid and assistance of such an Invasion, as being against the Law of God, of Nature, and of Nations, and as being a war directly against Jesus Christ, in the maintenance of Antichrist, and his Antichristian Hierarchy; and so such, as must needs recoil, and that in divine fury upon England itself, which having burned her neighbour's house, exposeth her own to the flames. Yea for England to Invade Scotland for no other cause in truth, than before mentioned, namely, for their maintaining of the true Faith and Religion of Christ, and their just laws and Liberties, which all true Christians, and Civil States ought to lay down their very lives for; (as the light of Nature taught the very Heathen, Pugnare pro Aris ac focis; and that Grecian could say, A'iresomai teleutan mallon,' è a'neleutheros sun: I choose rather to die, a freeman, then to live a Slave. And the monarchical estate, governed by good Laws, was ever preferred, and opposed to Tyranny) were to renounce and give up her own ancient Liberties, and to betray, and persecute, and destroy the true Faith and Religion of Christ, and so set up and profess the Infidelity and Idolatry of Antichrist, and so with him and his cursed crew, to go into perdition. The Primitive Christians under Julian the Apostata, served him in the wars against his Enemies: but when he Commanded them to go against Christians, who refused to worship, or offer Incense to his Idols, they cast down their Weapons, acknowledging the Emperor of heaven. And when Saul 
* 1 Sam. 22.  commanded his Servants to fall upon the Lord's Priests, none of them would do it. And I read of a Secretary to an Empress, who being commanded by her to draw an Edict againg the Christians, he still found delays: but at length she growing instant upon him for it, so as he could no longer delay it, he took off his Military girdle (the ensign of his service) and cast it at her feet, and so discharged himself from her Court.  
Thus, if you make, and leave these Christian, zealous, and just Protestations among the Recods of Parliament, in case it shall be by the malice and enchantments of the Prelates unhappily dissolved, before you can produce them into a full Act, and establish them for a Law: though otherwise ye cannot effect a real Reformation of all the mischiefs and maladies, which the Prelates in special have filled the Land withal: yet forasmuch as you have thus publicly, both for your own persons, and as the Body representative of the whole State of the Land, solemnly protested against all these things: there is no question to be made, but that God in his mercy and favour will accept of your will for the deed itself, and will still preserve both you and your posterity, and the whole Land from destruction, and will find out some other way for the rooting out of the Hierarchy; according to those prophecies in the Revelation, the full filling of which cannot be far off.  
Now the Lord Jesus Christ guide and govern the King's heart to the love of God, and of his truth, and let him clearly see how miseraby he hath been abused by those notorious hypocrites, his flattering and Sycophantising Prelates, and so take off and divide his Noble heart from them, that being reconciled to God in reforming the manifold and horrible abuses, which the Prelates, to the dishonour of God, and of the King, have been the Authors and Instruments of, and being united to his loving and loyal People, as the Head to the Body, in this Body representative, the Parliament: he may long reign over this Land, and all his other kingdoms in much peace and prosperity. And the same Lord Jesus Christ so unite the hearts of this Parliament unto God, and to the King, and among themselves, and so guide them by the wisdom of his Spirit and Grace, that they may sit, and consult, and conclude such righteous Acts and Decrees, as may be for the honour of God, and of the King, for the advancement of Christ's kingdom, and the establishment of the King's Throne upon the Pillars of good Government with justice and mercy, in punishing the wicked, and relieving the afflicted and oppressed Innocents, as David in that psalm penned for his son Solomon, a type of Christ, prayed saying, 
* Psal. 72.  Give the King thy judgemen, o God, and thy righteousness unto the King's Son. He shall judge thy people with righteousness, and thy poor with judgement. He shall judge the poor of the people, he shall have the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressors. Even as the Heathen also said of the duty of Kings, which was, Parcere subjectis, et debellare superbos: To spare his Subjects, and the proud beat down. And as they said of Julius Caesar, Caesar dando sublevando, ignoscendo, gloriam adeptus est: Caesar by giving, relieving, and pardoning, got himself a glorious Name. And lastly, the same Lord Jesus Christ, power his Spirit of Grace and Supplication upon all the people of the Land, that being sensible both of their own Sins, and of the national Sins of the Land, as also of the heavy yoke of Anticrhist, and the burdens of Egypt, wherewith those Taskemasters, the Prelates, have pressed them down, and broken their backs, and made their lives bitter unto them, they may truly repent and reform their lives, and cry aloud to the Lord, as his People in Egypt did against their Taskmasters, and pray incessantly for the good success of this Parliament, that it may be as a Moses sent of God in the 
‡ Cum duplicantur Lateres, tunc venit Moses.  doubling of their Bricks, to deliver them, from the spiritual Egyptian bondage of the Prelates: and daily to pray for the King their sovereign, and for his happy and truly Religious reign over them, that they may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 
〈◊〉 2● 2.  Amen Even so come Lord Jesus and help thy poor England, and thy poor People therein. Amen.  
FINIS.