THE justification OF THE independent churches of CHRIST. Being an Answer to Mr. Edward's his book, which he hath written against the Government of Christ's church, and Toleration of Christ's public Worship; briefly DECLARING That the Congregations of the Saints ought not to have dependency in Government upon any other; or direction in worship from any other than CHRIST their HEAD and lawgiver. By KATHERINE CHIDLEY.  1 SAM. 17. 45. Thou comest unto me with a Sword, and with a spear, and with a shield, but I come unto thee in the name of the Lord of hosts the God of the armies of Israel, whom thou hast defied. judges 4. 21. Then Jael, Heber's wife took a nail of the tent, and took an hammer in her hand, and went softly unto him, and smote the nail into his temples and fastened it into the ground, (for he was fast asleep and weary) and so he died. 
LONDON, Printed for WILLIAM LARNAR, and are to be sold at his Shop, at the sign of the Golden Anchor, near paul's-chain. 1641.   

TO The CHRISTIAN READER; Grace, Mercy, and Peace, from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ.  
IT is, and hath been (for a long time) a Question more inquired into than well weighed; Whether it be lawful for such, who are informed of the evils of the Church of England, to Separate from it: For my own part, considering that the Church of England is governed by the Canon laws (the Discipline of Antichrist) and altogether wanteth the Discipline of Christ, and that the most of them are ignorant what it is, and also do profess to worship God by a stinted service-book. I hold it not only lawful, but also the duty of all those who are informed of such evils, to separate themselves from them, and such as do adhere unto them; and also to join together in the outward profession and practice of God's true worship, when God hath declared unto them what it is; and being thus informed in their minds of the knowledge of the will of God (by the teaching of his son Jesus Christ) it is their duty to put it in practice, not only in a Land where they have Toleration, but also where they are forbidden to preach, or teach in the name (or by the power) of the Lord Jesus.  
But Mr. Edward's (with whom I have here to deal) conceiving that the beauty of Christ's true worship, would quickly discover the Foggy darkness of the Antichristian devised worship; and also that the glory of Christ's true Discipline, grounded and founded in his Word, would soon discover the blackness and darkness of the Antihristian Government (which the poor people of England are in bondage unto) hath set his wits a work to withstand the bright coming of Christ's kingdom (into the hearts of men) which we are all commanded in the most absolute rule of Prayer to petition for; for the turning aside whereof Mr. Edwards hath mustered up his forces, even eight Reasons, against the government of Christ, which he calls independent; and hath joined unto these eight, ten more; which he hath made against Toleration▪ affirming that they may not practise contrary to the course of the Nation wherein they live, without the leave of the Magistrate, neither judgeth he it commendable in them to ask the Magistrates leave, nor commendable in the Magistrate to hear their petitions, but rather seeketh to stir up all men to disturb their peace, affirming most unjustly, that they disturb the peace of the kingdom, nay, the peace of three kingdoms, which all the lands under the King's Dominions know to be contrary, nay I think most of the kingdoms in Europe cannot be ignorant what the cause of the disturbance was;  
But this is not the practice of Mr. Edward's alone, but also of the whole generation of the clergy; as thou Mayst know, Christian Reader, it was the practice of the Bishop of Canterbury to exclaim against Mr▪ Burton, Doctor Bastwick, and Mr. Prynne, calling them scandalous libelers, & Innovators (though they put their own name to that which they write, and proved what they taught by divine authority) and this hath been always the practice of the instruments of Satan, to accuse the Lord's people, for disturbing of the peace, as it hath been found in many Nations, when indeed the troublers be themselves and their father's house. But in this they are like unto Athalia crying treason, treason, when they are in the treason themselves.  
But for the further strengthening of his army, he hath also subjoined unto these his Answer to six Reasons, which he saith, are theirs, but the form of some of them seemeth to be of his own making; all which thou shalt find answered, and disproved in this following Treatise.  
But though these my Answers are not laid down in a Schollerlik way, but by the plain truth of holy Scripture; yet I beseech thee have the patience to take the pains to read them, and spare some time to consider them; and if thou findest things disorderly placed, la●our to rectify them to thine own mind. And if there be any weight in them, give the glory to God; but if thou seest nothing worthy, attribute not the weakness thereof to the truth of the cause, but rather to the ignorance and unskilfulness of the weak Instrument.  
Thine in the Lord Jesus, KATHERINE CHIDLEY▪   

THE Answer to Mr. Edward's his introduction.  
_● Hearing the complaints of many that were godly, against the book that Mr. Edwards hath written; and upon the sight of this his Introduction, considering his desperate resolution, (namely) that he would set out several Tractates against the whole way of Separation. I could not but declare by the testimony of the Scripture itself, that the way of Separation is the way of God, who is the author of it, 
* Deut. 32▪ ●. 1 King. ●. 53.  which manifestly appears by his separating of his Church from the world, and the world from his Church in all ages.  
When the Church was greater than the world, than the world was to be separated from the Church; but when the world was greater than the Church, than the Church was to separate from the world.  
As for instance;  
When Cain was a member of the Church, than the Church was greater than the world; and Cain being discovered, was exempted from God's presence; 
* Gen. 4▪ 14. 15. 16.  before whom he formerly had presented himself: 
c Gen. 4. 3.  but in the time of Noah, when the world was greater than the Church 
d Mat. 24. 38. 39 1 Pet. 3. 20.  than Noah and his Family who were the Church, were commanded to go into the ark 
e Gen▪ 7▪ 1.  in which place they were saved, when the world was drowned. 
f Ver. 21, 22, 23.  yet Ham being afterward discovered, was accursed of his Father, and Shem was blessed, and good prophesied for Japhat.  
Afterward when the world was grown mightier than the Church again, than Abraham was called out of Vr of the Chaldeans▪ both from his country and from his kindred, and from his father's house 
g Gen. 12. 1.  (because they were idolaters) to ●●●ship God in Canaan.  
Moreover, afterwards Moses was se●●, and his brother Aaron, to deliver the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt when Pharaoh vexed them, 
h Exo. 3. 7▪ 8▪ 9 10. Chap. 6. 26. 27.  at which time God wrought their deliverance, 
i And 12▪ ●2.  separating wondrously between the Egyptians and the Israelites, and that which was light to the one, was darkness to the other.  
Afterwards, when Cerah and his Congregation rebelled against God, and were obstinate therein 
k Num 16. 12, 13 14.  the people were commanded to depart from the tents of those with 〈…〉 
l Ver. 21. 24, 25, 26.  were the children separated from the parents, and those who did not separate▪ were destroyed by fire, 
m Ver. 35.  and swallowed by the earth, 
n Ver. 31, 32, 33.  upon the day which God had appointed 
* Ver. 5.  as 〈…〉 Noah's time, who repented not▪ were swallowed by wate●  
Moreover, when God brought his people into the promised Land, he commanded them to be separated from the Idolaters, 
Deut. 5. 26. 27.  and not to meddle with the accursed things. And for this cause God gave them his Ordinances and commandments; and by the manifestation of their Obediance to them, they were known to be the only people of God, 
* Deut. 28. 9 10.  which made a real separation.  
And when they were carried captive into Babylon a● any 
Ezza. 1. Hag. 1. 2, 3. 4. 8. 12. 14.  time for their sins: God raised them up deliverers to bring them from thence: and Prophets to call them from thence 
p Ier 51. 6.  and from their backesliding. 
q Ier. 3. 12. Hos. 11, 7.  And it was the practice of all the Prophets of God, (which prophesied of the Church under the New Testament) to separate the precious from the vile, and God hath declared that he that so doth shall be as his mouth, Jer. 15. 19  
And we know it was the practice of the Apostles of the Lord Jesus, to declare to the people that there could be no more agreement between believers and unbelievers, than between light and darkness, God and Belial, as Paul writing to the Corinthians doth declare, when he saith, Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers; for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness, and what concord hath Christ, with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth 
Christ made so great a difference between the world and the Church, that he would not pray for the world; yet would die for the Church, which was given him out of the world; and without a Separation the Church can not be known from the world.  with an infidel? and what agreement hath the Temple of God with idols? for ye are the Temple of the living God, as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people; Wherefore come out from among them, and by ye Separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you, and I will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty, 1 Cor. 6. 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.  
Moreover, they are pronounced blessed, which read, hear, and keep the words of the book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ; 
r Rev. 1. 3▪  among which sentences, there is a commandment from heaven for a total Separation. 
s Rev. 18. 4.   
These things (in brief) I have minded from the Scriptures, to prove the necessity of Separation; and though the Scripture be a deep Well▪ and containeth in the Treasures thereof innumerable Doctrines and Precepts tending to this purpose; yet I leave the further prosecution of the same, till a fitter opportunity be offered to me, or any other whom the Lord shall endue with a greater measure of his Spirit.  
But Mr. Edward's, for preparation to this his desperate intention, hath sent these Reasons against independent government, and Toleration, and presented them to the honourable House of Commons; which Reasons (I think) he would have to be get a Snake, to appear (as he saith) under the green grass; for I am sure, he cannot, ●ake the humble petitions of of the King's subjects to be a Snake, for petitioning is a way of peace and submission, without violence or venum; neither can it cast dirt upon any government of the Nation, as he unjustly accuseth the Protestation Protested, for that Author leaveth it to the Magistrate, not undertaking to determine of himself what government shall be set ever the Nation, for the bringing of men to God but leaveth it to the consideration of them that have authority,  
And whereas Mr. Edward's grudges that they preach so often at the Parliament; in this he is like unto Amaziah, who bid the Prophet Amos to flee away into the Land of Ju●●a, and not to prophesy at Bethel, the King's chapel, and the House of the kingdom. 
* Amos 7. 12. 13.   
And though Mr. Edward's boast himself hear, to be a Minister of the gospel, and a sufferer for it, yet I challenge him, to prove unto me, that he hath any Calling or Ordination to the Ministry, but that which he hath successively from Rome; If he lay claim to that; he is one of the Pope's household; But if he deny that calling▪ then is he as void of a calling to the work of the Ministry, and as void of Ordination, as any of those Ministers, whom he calleth independent men, (which have cast off the Ordination of the Prelates) and consequently as void of Ordination as a macanicall trades man.  
And therefore I hope that Honourable House that is so full of wisdom (which Mr▪ Edwards doth confess) will never judge these men unreasonable, because they do Petition, nor their petitions unreasonable before they are tried, and so proved, by some better ground, than the bare entrance of Mr. Edward's his Cavit, or writ of Ne admittas, though he saith he fo●ched it from heaven; for I know it was never there, Neither is it confirmed by the Records of holy Scripture, but taken from the practice of Nimrod, That mighty Hunter before the Lord, 
* Gen. 10. 8, 9  and from the practice of Haman that wicked persecucuter, 
* Ecster 3. 8. 6, 6.  & from the evil behaviour and malicious speeches, and gesture of wicked Sanballet, 
* Neh, 6.  and Tobias, who were both bitter enemies to God, and sought to hinder the building of the walls of Jerusalem.  
But the Prophet Haggai, reproveth not only such as hindered the building of the Lord's House▪ but also those that were contented to live in their seyled Houses, and suffer the Lord's House to lie waste, Hag. 1-   

AN answer To Mr. Edward's his book, entitled, REASONS against the Independent GOVERNMENT in particular CONGREGATIONS.  

Mr. Edward's,  
I Understanding that you are a mighty Champion, and now mustering up your mighty forces (as you say) and I apprehending they must come against the host of Israel, and hearing the Armies of the Living God so defied by you, could not be withheld, but that I (in stead of a better) must needs give you the meeting.  
First. Whereas you affirm, That the Church of God (which is his House and kingdom) could not subsist with such provision as their father gave them: which provision was (by your own confession) the watering of them by Evangelists, and Prophets, when they were planted by the Apostles, and after planting and watering to have Pastors and Teachers, with all other Officers▪ set over them by the Apostles & their own Election, yet notwithstanding all this provision, the Father hath made for them, it was evident (say you) they could not well stand of themselves, without some other help.  
This was the very suggestion of Satan into the hearts of our first Parents; for they having a desire of some thing more than was warranted by God, took unto them the forbidden fruit, as you would have the Lord's Churches to do when you say they must take some others besides these Churches and Officers, and that to interpose authoritatively; and these something else you make to be Apostles, Evangelists, and Elders of other Churches, whereas you confessed before, that these are the furniture of Christ's kingdom; and we know their authority was limited, within the bounds of the Word of God: as first, If any of them would be greater, he must be servant to all. Secondly, they were forbidden to be Lords over God's heritage. Thirdly, they were commanded to teach the people, to observe only those things which Christ had commanded them.  
And whereas you seem to affirm, that these Offices were extraordinary and ceased, and yet the Churches have still need of them: You seem to contradict yourself, and would fain cure it again, in that some other way which you say, you have to supply the want of them, but this other way you have not yet made known: You presuppose, it may be by some Sinods and counsels, to make a conjunction of the whole.  
If you mean such a counsel▪ as is mentioned▪ Acts 15. 4. 22, consisting of Apostles and Elders with the whole Church: then you have said no more than you have said before, and that which we grant, for this is still the furniture of the kingdom; but if you intend that your counsel should consist of an army of archbishops Diocesan Bishops, Deans, Suffragans, with the rest of that rabble, which be for their titles names of blasphemy, and such as were bred in the smoke of the pit. I deny that any of these be ordained of God, for they have no footing in his word; therefore indeed these are a part of the fruit of the forbidden Tree, which the Churches of God have taken and eaten; and this seeking out inventions of their own, after that God made them righteous, hath brought them into a state of apostasy, even as jeroboam's high places and Calves did the people of Israel; which may plainly appear by the Churches of Asia. If these be that some other supply which you mean and have produced to help the Churches, and Cities of God (as you call them) to determine for those Churches and Cities the cases of Doctrine and Discipline in stead of those many Ministers which, you conceive them now to want, it tends to make (as they have now done) a conjunction not only of all the Churches professing one faith into one body; but also of all the Armies of the Man of sin, and so to confound the Church and the world together, which the Ministers of the 
●●●. 15. 19  gospel ought to divide, by separating the precious from the vile▪  
And whereas you affirm, The Independent Congregations now have but few Ministers;  
It is very true, for indeed they are but a few people, and a few hands will feed a few mouths sufficiently, if God provide meat.  
But whereas you affirm, That those Congregations may have no Officer, at all by their own grounds, and yet be independent.  
I think, they conceive by those grounds, the Office only of Pastor, and Teacher; but not that the Church of God hath need at any time of the help of any other, than God hath given and set in his Church, which be all the Officers that are before mentioned, as Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers; and to have recourse to any for counsel, help, or assistance, either of Church or Ministry, which is not of Christ's own, were very ridiculous. For it is recorded, Ephe. 4. 11. 12. That he gave these for the gathering together of the Saints for the work of the Ministry, and for the edification of the body of Christ, being so gathered; The time they must continue is, 
Verse 13. 14, 16. Compared with 1 Cor. 12.  till all the Saints be in the unity of faith. The reason wherefore they were given, was to keep people from being tossed too and fro with every wind of Doctrine. And these are they, by whom all the body is coupled and knit together, by every joint for the furniture thereof, according to the effectual power, which is in the measure of every part, and receiveth increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love. And this is according to the promise that Christ made, Matth. 28. 19 20. to be with his Ministers in teaching his people to the end of the world.  
And thus you may see Mr. Edwards, you cannot gather from our own words, that we have need of the help of any other Churches▪ or Ministers, to interpose (as you unjustly affirm) as it may plainly appear by Mr. Robinson's own words in the Justification of the Separation, pag. 121. 122. These are his words; It is the steward's duty to make provision for the family; but what if he neglect this duty in the Master's absence? Must the whole family starve, yea and the wife also? Or is not some other of the family best able to be employed for the present necessity? The like he saith concerning the government of a Ship, of an army▪ and of commonwealths; alluding to the Church of Christ. And further expresseth, that as a private Citizen may become a Magistrate, so a private member may become a Minister, for an action of necessity to be performed, by the consent of the rest, &c.  
Therefore it appears plainly by all that hath binsaid, that the Churches of Christ may be truly constituted according to the Scripture, and subsist a certain time without Pastor and Teacher, and enjoy the power of Christ amongst themselves having no dependency upon any other Church or Churches which shall claim Authority or superiority over them.  
And thus much for your first Reason.   

NOw in your second Reason, which runneth upon the calling of the Ministry, you affirm, That the government of the Independent Congregations is not of divine institution.  
Which I utterly deny, and will prove it, by disproving the following Instances by which you affirm to prove it.  
Whereas you affirm, That their independency forces them to have Ministers without Ordination.  
I Answer, it is a plain case by the foregoing Answer, to your first Reason, that you speak untruly, for their practice is there made known to be otherwise; and if you will still affirm, that they have not power so to practise, you will thereby deny the truth of the Scriptures; for the Apostles were commanded to teach the Churches, to observe all things whatsoever Christ had commanded them. But Christ commanded the Apostles to ordain Elders in every Church by election; therefore the Apostles taught the Churches to ordain Elders by Election also. And whereas you bid us produce one instance (if we can) for an ordinary Officer to be made without Ordination, it is needless; for we (whom you call independent) strive for no such thing, as you have proved it plainly out of Mr. Robinson's book, Apol. Chap. 1. 18. to which I send you to learn better.  
Further, you allege, That if they be ordained, it is by persons who are not in office.  
Now if you mean, they have no office because they are not elected, ordained and set apart by the clergy to some serviceable, admini●●ation; I pray you tell me who ordained the Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists to their work or Ministry? If you will say they were ordained of God, I will grant it, and do also affirm that God hath promised the supply of them, to the end of the world, as before hath been mentioned, from Ephe. 4. As also, it appears by Paul's charge to Timothy; 2 Tim. 2. 2. That what things he had heard of him, among many witnesses, the same he should commit to faithful men who should be able to teach others also: but I verily do believe, that as Titus, so Timothy heard of Paul that Elders must be ordained by Election in every city, and that Titus was as much bound to communicate the things unto others, which he had learned of Paul, as Timothy was, and Timothy (we know) was to teach faithful men, and those faithful men were to teach others those things that they had heard of Timothy, among which things Ordination was one, as it was delivered to Titus; and we are not to doubt of Timotheus' faithfulness in the declaring of this part of his message more than the rest, but if those to whom Timothy delivered it, were not faithful in the discharge of their duty: but that in due time the Ordinances might possibly grow out of use, as the Churches▪ did by little and little apostate; yet that hinders not but that it was still written in the Scripture▪ that the generations to come might recover again the right use of the Ordinances when God should by his Spirit direct them to know the same.  
Moreover▪ I affirm, that all the Lord's people, that are made Kings and Priests to God, have a free voice in the Ordinance of Election, therefore they must freely consent before there can be any Ordination; and having so consented they may proceed to Ordination, notwithstanding they be destitute, of the counsel or assistance of any neighbour Church; as if there were no other Churches in the Land, but only one company of believers joined together in fellowship, according to Christ's institution. The promise made in the 14th. of John 12. 13. is made unto them, where Christ said. The works that he did they should do ●s●; & that whatsoever they should ask in his name, that he would do for the●, that the Father may be glorified, and that the Spirit of truth should ●●ide with them for ever. And that he should teach them all things, and bring all things unto their remembrance, as it is said in the following verses of the same Chapter. This (you may see) is the portion of believers, and they that have this portion are the greatest in the world, and many of them are greater than one, but many joined together in a comely order in the fellowship of the gospel, according to the Scriptures, are the greatest of all and therefore have power to ordain, and to bless their Ministers in the name of the Lord. Thus the lesser is blessed of the greater.  
Now Mr. Edwards, I hope you will confess, that you spoke unadvisedly, when you affirmed, The maintenance of independency, was the breaking of God's Ordinance, and violating of that Order and constant ●●y of Ministers recorded in the Word.  
To this I Answer, that if the Church do elect one, he must be elected out of some more, & those that are not elected, may be as able to bless the Church in the name of the Lord, as he; therefore one of these who are not elected, being chosen by the whole Church, to bless him in the name of the Lord, whom the Church hath ordained, is the hand of the whole (who are greatest of all, and so a sufficient Officer for that work which he is put a part to do.  
Thus you may see (Mr. Edward's) that we do not hold Ordination extraordinary and temporary; neither do we hold it the least of God's Institutions, for we have respect unto them all; But that nothing in matter of Order hath so clear and constant a practice as this (as you do affirm) and also say, the whole frame of Church and Discipline, hath not so much ground in the word for it as this. I deny, and do affirm, that not only this, but all God's Ordinances have as much ground and footing in God's Word also.  
Yet notwithstanding you say, that Calvin confesseth, that there is no express precept concerning the imposition of hands: Hath the imposition of hands no footing in God's Word? and yet hath not all the form of God's Worship so much footing as it? Here Mr. Calvin and you, will now pin all the form of Church and Discipline, upon unwritten verities.  
Further, you rehearse confusedly, the opinion of Zanchius to strengthen yours who (say you) would have the example of the Apostles and ancient Church, to be more esteemed of, and to be instead of a command.  
I pray you, how do you know it to be their example, if it be not written?  
And whereas you allege, that Zanchius saith, it is no vain Ceremony but the holy Spirit is present to perform things inwardly▪ which are signified by this Ordinance outwardly.  
I have granted you that already, where I affirm, that the Church having the Spirit of God hath power by an instrument of her own choosing, to bless the party to his work in the name of the LORD; and I am also bound to believe, that God will accompany that his own Ordinance (which is performed by them outwardly) with his own Spirit inwardly, to furnish the party (so blessed by them) with the knowledge of the Scripture, which is able to furnish the man of God to every part of his duty. And thus you may see, that we have not departed from Christ's way, nor gone any other way, in things concerning his House and Officers, than he hath directed.  
And whereas you demand for what cause Paul left Titus at Cr●●te? I answer, that I have told you before, that it was to communicate the things unto others, which he had learned, whereof Ordination was one. And no doubt but he declared the same to faithful men, that they might teach others also, therefore he was there employed in preaching of the gospel, as well as if he had gone preaching with Paul.  
The next thing you go upon, is the trial of the gifts of Ministers, and this you attribute to them which have the greatest measure of the Spirit, for you say, Examination belongeth to the most skilful, and they who have most authority.  
All these things are well allowed of by us, for who hath a greater measure of the Spirit than believers? and who hath more skill than he that hath been trained up in the school of Christ? and hath learned this Lesson to be obedient to his Master Christ in keeping of all his commandments? and who hath greater authority upon the earth than they that are visible Saints? and what makes men visible Saints? if not the manifestation of their obedience to God the Father, and Christ his son, in the practice of all his Ordinances, and not to have some other Presbyters present with them, to assist them, (as you affirm) for by these other Presbyters, I know not yet who you mean.  
And whereas you say, that the Church may be led into errors, or kept in a low estate by unfit Pastors and Elders.  
I answer, It is a clear truth; as woeful experience teacheth us, who live here in the Land of England.  
And whereas you affirm, that visible Saints cannot ordain Officers, because they have no gifts of prayer.  
I Answer, Here you make prayer the Ordination of Ministers.  
And whereas you say they are not able to conceive prayer.  
Here you give the holy Ghost the lie: for believers have received the Spirit of adoption to cry Abba Father,  
But say you, they cannot conceive prayer according to the action in bo●●.  
Here you would seem to make believers, which have the Spirit of God, to lead them into all truths, more void of common reason, than men that have but gifts of nature.  
again, you say, they have not gifts to make public exhortation, and admonition.  
To which I answer, If they had first knowledge to feel the want of a Pastor, and also divers able men out of whom to elect and ordain a Pastor, than they out of whom this person is chosen, are able to exhort, and to admonish: for he that hath not the gift of teaching, may have the gift of exhortation: again, the man that undertaketh to teach others, aught to be taught by God, and likewise to be able by sound Doctrine to withstand the gainsayers, but a man may give good exhortations, (and that publicly) that is not able to withstand the gainsayers by sound Doctrine. By this you may see, the Church of God can never be without some Ministers, except it be (according to that spoken by Zacha●iah) in the day of very small things indeed, when God shall take away their Ministers by death, prison, or exile: for seeing the Churches were planted by Ministers of God's own ordaining; therefore they were not without Ministers in the very beginning: and still the Churches are planted by the ministerial power of the Lord Jesus, which cannot be exercised without fit instruments; Yet that they must want the word preached, or Sacraments administered, till they have Pastors and Teacher in Office, is yet to be proved, but that page of Mr. Robinsons, which hath been alleged before, is sufficient for this present purpose against you, even to prove that the family must not be unprovided for, either for the absence or neglect of a Steward.  
But now you seem to insinuate an affirmation, or a supposition, I cannot well tell whether, That a ruling Elder may be destitute of the gift of discering, and seem to imply, that if he be destitute, than all the Church must be destitute, if there be no more Officers than be.  
Here you would fain make the ruling Elders, the eyes of the Church, and then all the rest of the body must be blind, and so unfit to have any hand in election, and also void of the Spirit of Grace to discern the gifts by, though it hath been proved unto you before, that she is the greatest of all, having the Spirit of God to lead her into all truth, being the Spouse of Christ, and endowed with all his riches, gifts, and donations.  
And thus you still deny the Authority, & ability of the Church giving to the persons in office all power and deserning. But this is indeed according to your practice here in England, but not according to the mind and Spirit of God.  
And for the neighbour church's counsel, I deny not, but that it may be embraced, and the Saints have cause to praise God for any helps of God's ordaining. But if they want the help of a neighbour Church to counsel them, or neighbour Ministers to direct them: yet if they be a Church of Jesus Christ, they have (as hath been said before) power among themselves to elect and ordain their own Officers; as also the Spirit of discerning▪ whereby to try their gifts, and yet be far from falling into that evil, which they complain against in the episcopacy (namely) for one man to have the sole power of Ordination.  
By all these particulars, you may clearly see all your pretended proofs and former assertions disproved, as I promised you, in the entrance of this my answer to your second Reason.  
So that these two first Reasons, being (as I conceive) the greatest Champions, which you have sent out in this skirmage, are now both slain, and made void of all the life that ever was in them, for, they were made most of suppositions, and of things that appeared unto you by likelihood, without any ground from the Scriptures: and of some other thing than God's Word allowed: and of some trivial affirmations which were not grounded upon any truth of God's Word.  
Now, these two being thus turned aside, by one of the meanest of all the Army of Jesus Christ, you may justly fear, that all the rest of your soldiers will run away wounded.   

IN your third Reason,▪ You say it is not to be thought, that Christ would institute such a Government of his Church which affords no help; nor allows no way or remedy for innocent persons that are wronged.  
Which thing I grant to be very true; but touching the means and helps which you plead for, that is, some other Synods to appeal unto, I tell you I know not what Synods you mean. But this I affirm that there are no larger Synods to be kept to settle Church differences, than the coming together of the Ministers, and Brethren, as it is mentioned in the 15th. of the Acts, which I have granted you in my Answers to your former Reasons.  
And whereas you strive for appeals:  
I Answer, It is the rule of Christ, that if one brother do 
Matth. 1●▪ 15. 16. 17▪  trespass against another; and if the brother offending will not be reclaimed by the private admonition of the brother offended, he is to be admonished by one or two other brethren with him; but if he will not hear them, the brother offended is to tell the Church; and if he will not hear the Church, than he is not to be accounted a brother but as a Heathen man and a Publican; if not as a brother, than out of the fellowship: then if the wrong be any personal injury, as oppression, or fraud, or any other sin of these natures, the Law is open, where he may appeal for Justice to the Magistrate in any part of the kingdom, wherever he liveth; but if it be a matter of scandal; as if he should be a drunkard, or incontinent, or the like, than he hath sufficient remedy, when such a one is cast out of his society. By this you may see, the way of government given by Christ Jesus, the King of peace, is the way of peace and righteousness.  
And whereas you affirm, That if the controversy touching Circumcision, should have been ended in the Church of Antiochia, than parties must have been judges.  
Here, you would seem by this to make the whole Church of Antioch leavened with the Doctrine of Justification by Circumcision, which to do is a very great slander, as it appears by Paul & Barnabas opposing them there, and that Churches sending Paul and Barnabas to have the Churches advise at Jerusalem concerning 
Acts 15. 1. ●●.  this matter.  
But whereas you affirm, That the Church of Antiochia, judged it unequal to decide the case among themselves:  
I answer, That they judged it unequal, is more than is expressed in that place: but if that should be granted, it will make against you, for their reason in sending the matter to Jerusalem, was, because the parties were members of the Church of Jerusalem, as it appears by Acts. ●5. 1. 5. 24. The first verse showeth, that they were men of Judea; the 5th. verse proves that they were believers▪ The 24th▪ verse declares, that they went out of the Church of Jerusalem unto them. And by this you may see plainly, that this Chapter (above all the Chapters that I can find) proves independency upon your own ground; that the Church of Antiochia judged it an unequal thing for them to judge the members of the Church of Jerusalem. And by this you may perceive, how you have either erred, not knowing the Scriptures or else you have done worse in labouring to darken the truth by evasions, or false glosses.  
Thus much for your third Reason.   

IN your fourth Reason you affirm, That the light and Law of Nature, with right reason, is against the independency of particular Churches▪ which is an unjust affirmation as hath been plainly proved before in the Answer to your third Reason.▪ But a few words concerning this Reason.  
You say it is found necessary, in bodies natural, that the particular members do join in one, for the good of the whole, and that the whole being greater than a part, the several parts should be subject too, and ordered by the whole: All this I have granted you freely▪ already in the Answer to your second Reason; where I have plainly proved unto you, that the hands of the Church are ordered by the whole body, in the Ordination of the ministry: And this is according to the very Scripture itself, for the holy Ghost speaketh so, in 1 Cor. 12. Comparing the Church of God to 
1 Cor. 12.  the natural body of a man; and therefore when the hand lanceth the foot, it cannot be said properly to be the action of the hand alone, because the hand is set a work, by the body; neither can the body set the hand a work, if it be destitute of the power, for the motion of the body cometh not from the hand▪ but the motion of the hand from the body; and thus you may see I have granted your comparison. And the nearer politic bodies do go to this Rule; the more orderly they are guided; for as all the cities and country of England, make up but one kingdom, and all the people in England ought to be subject to one King; so all the independent Congregations in England, and out of England, (that are guided by the laws of Christ) make up but one kingdom spiritually to him that is their King.  
Now concerning Armies; though I be very ignorant in these things▪ yet thus much I conceive, that all the Armies, that belong to the kingdom ought to be under the banner of their own King; even so all the particular Congregations of Christ, are to be guided by the laws of their own captain Christ, who rideth before them with his garments dipped in blood, and they follow after him riding upon white horses, Revel. 19 11, 12. 13, 14.  
We read also in the Scripture of another army, which were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ: And this army (I conceive) consisteth of those Locusts, which ascended out of the bottomless pit, Rev. 9 And these, as I told you before, are archbishops, Diocesan Bishops, Deans, Prebends, &c. and the rest of that rabble; and these also have a King over them, which is the angel of the bottomless pit, who is said to be the great red Dragon the devil and Satan, Rev. 12. 3. 9 and 20. 2. who gave unto this army his power and throne, and great authority, Rev. 13. 2. Therefore, to any counsels that are held, or Canon laws that are enacted by any captain of this army, the Churches of Christ ought not to submit, though they should be commanded, by any Statute Law of the kingdom; for those Statute laws are not according to Christ's Rule, but aught by all counsels of State to be repealed.  
And whereas you say, It is alleged by the Separation; that hold independency, That the Magistrate of Leyden cannot govern in Delft:  
This I hope you will grant; for I am sure the Magistrates of Coventry cannot execute their office in Shrewsbury, neither can the one town choose Magistrates for the other: and this still proves independency, for either of these may choose their own, and guide their own at all times, except they forfeit their Charter.  
Now whereas you say, the people allege for themselves, that the Law of nature teacheth them to make a Covenant; though there be neither precept nor practice of it in the word.  
I suppose you misconstrue their sayings, for the text alleged in Thessalonians 4● doth not prove that brotherly love was never written of in the Scripture; but that it had been so sufficiently taught of God by written precepts, that it needed not to be written again. Besides, I am able to prove by the Scripture, that there is both precept and practice for a Church Covenant: the which I will answer you in the Answer to your 6th. Reason, where you beg the Question.  
Concerning what is asserted by some Divines of Scotland, That in such things as are alike common to the Church, and Commonwealth, and have the same use in both, and that whatsoever natures light directeth the one, directeth the other also.  
You know (by what hath been formerly spoken) I have fully assented unto it.  
I also agree with Amesius, as far as he agrees with the truth; but to agree with you in that falsehood, that the Government of independent Churches, is against the light of nature and right Reason, that I have denied, and disproved sufficiently already.  
Thus having answered every particular thing in this Reason, that hath not been answered already, I proceed to the Fifth.   

IN your 5th. Reason you affirm, That there be many Rules in Scripture, that do require the combination of Churches into Synods; for proof whereof you say, that Amesius confesseth, the Rules and Commands to be such as these; Let all things be done to edification, decently and in order, Cor. 14. 26. 40. and follow after the things which make for peace, Rom. 14. 19 So Phil. 4. 8. And you conclude that Synods a●e found to be for edification, peace, and order. But you have brought no Scripture yet that proveth it▪ and I know all Scripture is against it, therefore I deny it. And as for the Scriptures alleged (as you say) by Amesius, they are such as were spoken to particular Congregations: and in the particular Congregation of coloss, Paul beheld a comely order, notwithstanding there were no Synod, consisting of any but only the members and Ministers of that Congregation, Col. 2. 5.  
And as for commands, which you say are some general, and others particular; Here you labour by evasions to turn away the truth; for you yourself know▪ that every particular command reacheth not to the general, though a general command reach to every particular. Now if you can show us in the Scriptures any general command, that all the Churches should, or an example that all the Churches did gather a council of some Ministers out of every particular Congregation, to make Decrees o● laws to impose upon the whole, than you will speak speak something to the purpose, but as yet you have not spoken one word that proveth any such thing.  
And whereas you allege that Scripture, That the Spirits of the Prophets must be subject to the Prophets, 1 Cor. 14. 32.  
I Answer, That that is given to particular Congregations; and therefore not to all in a Province or Nation, and so not to Synods: And Paul never sought to win credit nor obedience to Orders established by himself, (as you say) for he never made any other Orders, nor taught the people any other thing than what he had received of the Lord Jesus, as it is plain in 1 Cor. 11. Be ye followers of me (saith he) as I am of Christ, and in the 23. verse of the same Chapter, I have received of the Lord (saith he) that which I have delivered unto you. Paul also writes unto these Corinthians, (whom he had converted unto the faith) to be followers of him, 1 Cor. 4. ●6. in ver. 17. he showeth them, that therefore he sent Timothy unto them, to the end that Timothy should put them in remembrance of Paul's ways in Christ, as Paul had taught everywhere in every Church. Here you may see Paul brings not the Example of the Synod before them, nor lays upon them any Decree or Command, to practise otherwise than he himself had learned in Christ; yet I hope you will not deny, but that this Church spoken of, was a Church of Christ as well as the Church of coloss.  
Now the next thing to be considered is, that which you allege of Paul's submission, to the practice of what was agreed upon, by the common consent of James, and the rest of the Elders, Acts 21. from. 18. to 27.  
The Reason why they counselled Paul to do the thing, was, because of the information that the Jews had then against Paul▪ that he taught the people to forsake Moses, Acts 21. 21. Now I hope you will not deny, but that this was a false affirmation.  
The thing wherein they conceived he transgressed was, by bringing in Trophimus an Ephesian, (as they thought into the Temple) because they saw him with him in the city.  
This was but their supposition, as it appears in the 29 verse of this Chapter.  
Now what the Elders counselled Paul to do, in respect of giving offence to the Jews, was no injunction to any to follow the same example, except it were in the same case.  
Now Paul himself was a Jew, and taught all men that Christ was come to fulfil the Law, and not to destroy the Law; therefore he condescended to circumcise Timothy because his mother was a Jew, and the Jews knew his father was a Grecian. 
Act. 16. 1. 3.  But Titus a Grecian was not compelled to be circumcised; yea, though there were false brethren craftily crept in, to spy out their liberty; Paul gave not place to them, no not for an hour, gall 2. 3 4. 5.  
Now the things that the Elders counselled Paul to do, was to purify himself, with them that had a vow, and to contribute with them; and the reason wherefore they counselled Paul to do this, was, that it might appear to the Jews that Paul was a Jew, and not an uncircumcised person, for the Jews knew that it was a sinful thing to bring into the Temple any uncircumcised person in heart or flesh, Ezek. 44. 7.  
Now Paul in all this did nothing but what was commanded in the Law, as purifications and vows, &c.  
Moreover, this counsel of James and the Elders unto Paul, was not general to the believing Jews; neither was it generally or particularly to the Gentiles, but particularly to Paul, and the rest with him, because of the false report which the Jews had received of him.  
And as this counsel was not general, so it was not perpetual, but served to put an honourable end to the Law, which Christ came to fulfil, and not to destroy.  
By all this it appears, it maketh nothing for any counsel that you plead for, to establish any unwritten verities; for such counsels are the counsels of darkness: because they are not according to the Law and the Testimony, it appears there is no light in them: therefore they are not of authority to bind any particular member of the Church, much less the general, as you say they are.  
But seeing you confess, that no Synod can say▪ It seemeth good unto the holy Ghost and to us; it plainly appears that your counsels presume without the counsel of the holy Ghost. But you may see, that the Church of Jerusalem did nothing without the counsel of the Spirit, neither determined of any thing, that was not written in the Scripture. So the Churches of God now ought to presume to do nothing but what the written Word allows them; being taught the true meaning thereof by the Spirit that God hath given them.  
Moreover, the counsel of Jerusalem imposed nothing upon the Gentiles for a Law, but counselled them to abstain from some necessary things, which would be either offensive to the Jews, or sinful in themselves, Acts 15. 29. 20. 28. 29.  
Now seeing the Church of Jerusalem hath done nothing, but by he counsel of the written word, in forbidding things sinful in themselves and offensive to their brethren, it appears to be plainly against your Synods, and dependency in government, which in cases difficult, do establish things which have no footing in God's word; neither have they, by your own confession, in their Counsels any one, who is immediately and infallibly imspired by the Spirit, and able of himself to satisfy the controversy, they being by your own confession inferior to Paul and Barnabas; And Paul and Barnabas might teach nothing but what was taught in the Law and the Prophets. And therefore, by this it appears you have not grounded any affirmation or supposition upon God's word; for the proving either of your Synods or dependency.  
Thus much for your fifth Reason.   

IN your sixth Reason you affirm that the government of the Church by Synods, is nowhere forbidden by God in the new Testament, either directly, or by consequence.  
But I do affirm the contrary, and prove it thus;  
That whatsoever Government is not commanded by God is accursed, and that is plainly manifested in the New Testament▪ Rev. 22. 18.  
But your government by Synods is not commanded by God, and therefore it is accursed▪ as it will appear in the following discourse.  
Whereas you say, that all the Ministers are greater than one:  
I have already proved, that the Church of Christ is greater than all the Ministers. 
See the Answer to his second Reason against independency.   
You say Synods appoint no other office or Officer in the Church, which Christ hath not appointed.  
Me thinks you are strangely put to your shifts▪ that dare not tell the world what you mean by your Synods. But if you mean the council or Convocation that used to sit at Paul's, I have told you already they are none of the council of Christ, neither hath he appointed that council or any other council, to make, or ordain, either Officers or Offices for his Church, therefore so to affirm is blasphemy, for he himself is their Lord and lawgiver, and hath instituted every particular Ordinance in his Church, that the Church hath need of, therefore it is (as hath been said already) against the Law and light of nature▪ and contrary to edification, order, peace, pureness, loveliness, for any to decree for, or enjoin upon, the Assemblies of the Saints any other practice but those that the Apostles have taught, which they themselves had learned from the Lord Jesus: but as for you Mr. Edwards, it appeareth plainly that you do not understand nor see the form of the Lord's House; which causeth you to call upon any to produce a particular word, or rule, for the order of God's worship, what must be performed first, what second, what third, what fourth, and so of the rest; and that no Ordinance, and part of worship may be in another order. Further, you challenge them if they can, to show a particular word or rule out of the New Testament, for their Church Covenant, which you say, is the form of the Church.  
You also inquire for the form of Excommunication, and Ordination, and gestures in the several Ordinances of God. And this you say they are not able to do, but only in general rules.  
I have told you already that general rules reach to every particular, and that is no more than you seem to know already: for you have confessed, that there are general rules to teach every one of these particulars, which you could not choose but acknowledge; otherwise you would have made Christ not so faithful in his house as Moses. But the more you know, the greater is your sin, in that you labour to turn away the light; and you are still repairing of those thresholds, which have been set up by God's thresholds. If I had any hope therefore that you would be ashamed of all that you have done, I would show you, though not all that I see, yet what I am able to express of the form of the house of God, and the pattern thereof, and the 
See Ezek. 43. 11.  going out thereof, and the coming in thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and the laws thereof and write it in your sight, that so you may keep the whole fa-shion thereof, and all the Ordinances thereof, and do them.  
As for the Ordinance of Election, Ordination, and Excommunication &c. I have declared already the form to them that have their eyes open to see it. But they cannot see the form of the house, that have not repented them of the evils that they have done therefore I will cease to strive with such persons, for they may live and stay long enough, and be of no Church of Christ.  
Thus much for your Sixth Reason.   

IN your 7th. Reason you say, That consociation and combination, in way of Synods, is granted by themselves, (and you produce for your Authors these four; Christ on his Throne, Examination of Prelates Petition, Zion's Prerogative Royal, and the Protestation Protested; which Authors, if the Reader please to examine shall fina● clear against you) That which you have gathered here from these Authors is, that they grant that one Church should be content that matters of difference and importance should be heard by other Churches, as also to be advised and counselled by other Churches, &c.  
I answer, though all should confess, that it is profitable to have the counsel of their brethren and neighbour Churches in doubtful cases, yet this will be far from proving the lawfulness of your Synods; as may appear by the Authors that yourself hath here alleged, for they intend no such Consociation, nor Combination, which you have mentioned: but seeing yourself would have something which you cannot prove, you would beg of others to grant it or prove it for you.  
Concerning the Orders, or Decrees of the Church of Jerusalem (Acts 16. 4) they were not such Decrees as were alterable, but such as were warranted by God, and a perpetual Rule for all the Churches of the Gentiles.  
You need not tell me what Amesius speaketh of the parts of Discipline, as if any of the Separation, held it to consist all in Excommunication; for I have told you already, that they have seen the form of the Lord's house, and have respect unto all his Ordinances, and do not take one for all.  
Neither is it granted you, that admonitions and reproofès, and decreeing of Excommunications should be by Officers of other Churches, towards members of any Congregation, though in the same constitution; the contrary most evidently appeareth, even by the practice of the Church of Antioch, who brought the matter to the Church of Jerusalem, which concerned the Church of Jerusalem's members, neither may any of the Churches now be subject to the censures of other Congregations, except they must be subject to human Ordinances; but in case, both the members, and the Church, be obstinate in any known sin, then are the Churches of God bound to admonish her, and reprove her, and reject her; as if the Church of Antiochia had found the Church of Jerusalem all leavened with the Doctrine of justification by circumcision; then had the Church of Antiochia power to admonish, reprove, and reject the Church of Jerusalem, and not have communion with them, if they persisted obstinate in that evil; for the Church of Antiochia was not inferior in power to the Church of Jerusalem.  
Thus much for your seventh Reason.   

IN the beginning of your Eight Reason you say they grant and confe●se, That Churches of one constitution ought to withdraw from; and ●enounce communion and fellowship with a Congregation or Church that is fallen into sin, as false Doctrine, and evil discipline, &c.  
I answer, I have granted you, that in the conclusion of the answer to your 7d●. Reason, if the Church stand obstinate in sin, and will not be reclaimed.  
But that they should be complained on to Syn●ds and Classes, and subject to their censures, that is but a question of your own begging, and remains for you to prove, and denied of me.  
The next thing you would know is the v between excomm●●ication and reje●●ion, and would seem to make them both one▪  
To which I answer, Titus had power to reject a person, 
a Tit 3. 10.  but we do not read that he had power of himself to excommunicate that person.  
A wicked man may be said to reject God when he rejecteth his Word. So Saul rejected God, (1 Sam. 15. 23. therefore God rejected him from being King, vers. 26. but did he excommunicate God? So the people of Israel rejected God 1 Sam. 8. 7. and 10. 19 Did they therefore excommunicate God?  
Here Mr. Edwards, you may see that Excommunication is more than rejection, as it also plainly appears by Paul's words, 1 Cor. 5. 4. 5. where he delivers unto them the form of Excommunication, in these words; When ye are gathered together, and my spirit, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that such a one by the power of our Lord Jesus Christ be delivered unto Sat●an, &c. Here Mr. Edwards, you may plainly see the form of this part of the Lord's house; This you see Paul had determined before; and also that Paul's spirit was together with the Church in the action doing; yet Paul took not upon him that power of himself, but committed the action to the Church who had the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, as he himself testifieth, which plainly proves, that the Church had the power that Paul had not; for though Paul was a good Counsellor, yet he was no executioner in that action, but as a member for his part. Here Mr. Edwards you may see the difference between rejection and excommunication; a man in rejecting the Law of God, may be said to reject God, and he that adds to, or diminisheth from the laws of God, rejects God, in rejecting the counsel of God, which enjoins him neither to add, nor diminish: but you by pleading for your unknown Synods and ungrounded dependency, reject the counsel of God; and so do all those, that assist you in it.  
The next thing you affirm is; That this government of independency (which I have proved to be Christ's government) overthro●es the Communion of Saints.  
To which I answer, This appears to be contrary by that which hath been said already; as for example, the difference between the Church of Antiochia, and the Church of Jerusalem; turned to good, because they undertook not the authority to determine the case themselves, as hath been said; because it was against the members of the Church of Jerasalem: and this increased union and communion in both Churches, as we may plainly see, for Peter communicated unto them what God had revealed unto him: and Paul & Barnabas declared what God had done by them. James calls from● back to consider what Peter had declared; and backs it with the Scripture, manifesting how it agreed with the words of the Prophets, as you may read at large, in Act. 15. Thus you may see what sweet Communion was between these Churches that were both independent.  
Now, whereas you say 〈◊〉 be in a Christian commonwealth, or Nation.  
I do affirm it may stand with Christ's Church in a commonwealth, as may plainly appear in the three first Chapters of the Revelations, which testifies that there were seven Churc●●s in Asia, and these seven Churches were compared to seven g●●den candlesticks, 
b Rev. 1. 20.  and every candlestick stood by it se●●, and held forth her own light, as appears by those several m●●sages, which were sent to those seven Churches; for had they had a dependency one upon another in respect of power, than one message would have served unto them all; and what sin any of the Churches or Angels were guilty of, would have been laid unto the charge of all the Churches and Angels; but we see it was otherwise▪ As for instance; there was none charged for 
Rev. 2. 20.  suffering the woman Jezebel to teach the people; to commit for nication, and to eat things sacrificed to Idols, but the angel of Thyatria; by this you may plainly see there was not one angel set over them all, nor one Synod appointed to judge and correct them all, which is the thing you labour for. Yet it cannot be said that the independency of these seven Churches hindered their communion, either with Christ their head, or one with another: neither was it any disturbance to the commonwealth or Nation wherein they lived.  
And here you cannot say that I have eyaded, but have answered you directly, to these your doubts, and suppositions, and to many of your ●ffs, which have been, your spies sent out in this Scout; And moreover, I will answer all your many Reasons as I come to them (though they be joined in battle with these) I mean your following Reasons against Toleration; and also batter, or drive back your answers which you have made to the Six Reasons, which you say be theirs, and yet neither this Scout, nor the joined, nor the subjoined forces, shall be able to discover what strength is on my side, although they be formed by you in battle array.    

Now I have proved the independent Government to be Christ's Government; I will also prove in my Answers to these your following Reasons, that the independent Congregations perform Christ's public worship, and therefore ought to be tolerated, and maintained in the practice thereof.  

IN the beginning of your first Reason against Toleration, you grant, that the Scriptures speak m●ch for Toleration, and bearing with one another in many things, both in matters of opinion and practice, and the Scriptures you quote are very pertinent to this purpose, but always provided, they are to be understood as spoken properly to particular Congregations, and not unto any whole Nation.  
But to stand for the Toleration of the maintenance of heresy, and schism, is not the Toleration that we plead for (as far as hath been yet made known) but rather your insinuation: for I have declared unto you already in the driving back of the first Scout of your Army, That God hath provided a way and means to purge every Congregation of his from all such persons that do offend, whether it be in matters of Faith or Order. Neither do any that stand for Christian liberty condemn them for cruelty, or that it is against charity.  
For if we compare the Church with one man or a few than it will easily appear, that the one doth outweigh the other: ●nd you say, Calvin saith, It is cruel mercy which prefers one man, or a few, before the Church: To these words of Calvin I do fully agree unto, for they are of the same nature with my former Answers to your Reasons against independency, where I have proved against you, that the weight and power Ireth in the Church and that the Church is above the Ministers, and that the Ministers have their power by the Church to exercise in the Church, and not the Church by the Ministers.  
The next thing to be considered in this your Reason, is your peremptory affirmation, but grounded upon no Scripture, (namely) That to set up independent and separated Churches, is a schism in itself, and that it will make great disturbance in the Church, both to the outward peace, and to the faith and conscience of the people of the kingdom.  
Now that it is a schism in itself, I deny, and prove the contrary thus;  
God hath commanded all his people to separate themselves from all Idolatry 
c ● 2 Cor. 6. 14, 15. 16. 17.  and false worshipping 
d Rev. 14. 9, 10, 11. 12.  and false worshippers 
e Chap. 18. 4.  (and therefore it is no schism) except you will make God the Author of schism) & this is according to the Prophet Esaiahs' words, Esay 1. which is the first Lesson that every one ought to learn; even to cease to do evil. But I hope it will not be denied but that they are to learn another lesson, which is, to learn to do well: but to do well is to keep all God's commandments, and to obey God rather than men.  
Now God's commands to his people, is, that they learn to know the form of the house (as I have told you before) and all the Ordinances of the house, and to do them, Ezek. 43. 11. but the Ordinances of Christ's kingdom under the gospel, (amongst the rest) are Doctrine, Fellowship, breaking of Bread, and Prayer; which Ordinances the Saints continued steadfastly in, and are commended for their constancy in the same, Acts 2. 42 and that in every particular Church or Congregation, though there were divers in one Nation, and yet I hope you will not affirm it was any disturbance to the Nation (otherwise th●n Christ hath showed shall ever be, that the seed of the Serpent, shall persecute the seed of the Woman) for God's people are said to be a peaceable people and the Lord himself hath said that he hath set them in the world as Lambs among Wolves. Now there must needs be a disagreement between lambs and Wolves but the lambs are not the cause thereof. By this you may see that Separation is not a schism, but obedience to God's commandment.  
And for any Magistrate to give way for men to separate, from the worship of the kingdom established by Law (if that worship be not according to God's Law) is the Magistrates duty; and the Magistrate shall partake of no sin in so doing because there is no sin committed. Therefore the Magistrate ought not to forbid the practice of God's Worship; when he hath power to command it; for he is set up for the practice of those that do well, and for the punishment of evil ●oers.  
And therefore you did well, when you admonished the Parliament in your Epistle, to cast out of the way all stambling blocks, and to break 
See the 3. & 4 leaf of his Epistle.  down all Images, and Crucifixes; and to throw down all 〈◊〉, and remove the High places; and to break to pieces the brazen Serpents which have been so abused to Idolatry and Superstition. So than you grant, that much may be done (as it seemeth by your speech) and yet if there be not a full reformation, even to the throwing down of the High places, it will prove a blemish to the reformers.  
You say, he that doth not forbid, when he hath power, he commands. 
Reason. 1. Pag. 23.   
But I hope you doubt not but the Parliament hath power, and therefore whatsoever they do not forbid (by your own ground) they have or do command.  
But in the Protestation, they have not forbidden God's Worship, which is according to his Word; but they have Protested (and have enjoined others so to do) to maintain and ●●●end the Protestant Religion, expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England, against all Popery, and Popish Innovations, within this realm &c. And in the Interpretation of their meaning of the said Oath, they bind us neither to the ●●t form of Worship, Discipline, or Government, nor any Rites or Ceremonies of the said Church of England.  
Now if we must withstand Popery, and Popish Innovations, than we must needs withstand such dependency as makes up a whole Nation a Church both good and bad, without separating the precious from the vile, and also such Synods or Counsels that decree, and make laws, and impose them upon any Church to keep, having not the Word of God to warrant them; for these are Popish Innovations, and to be withstood by us, according to our Oath.  
And truly Mr. Edward's, you might have asked the independent Ministers a question in private, (for you knew where to find them) and not have propounded so silly a question before the Parliament, when there was none there to answer you.  
Your Question is, Whether it be fitting, that well meaning Christians 
Pag. 23.  should be suffered to go to make Churches?  
To this I Answer, It is fitter for well meaning Christians than for ill-meaning Christians, for well-meaning Christians be the fittest on the earth to make Churches, and to choose their Officers; whether they be tailors, feltmakers, Button-makers, Tent-makers, Shepherds, or ploughman, or what honest Trade soever, if they are well-meaning Christians; but ill-meaning Priests are very unfit men to make Churches; because what they build up with one hand, they pull down with the other.  
Futuher you seem to fear the s●reading of Heresies, if there be not a bi●drance of these Assemblies.  
But you should rather fear that your own glory would be eclipsed by their gifts and graces; for they are not men of so mean parts, as you would make them: but are able to divide the Word of God aright by the spirit that God hath given them. Therefore I would wish you rather to let your heart bleed for yourself and for the evils that you have done. For Christ will never suffer any to perish for whom he died.  
Thus much for your first Reason.   

IN your second Reason you say, the Toleration desired will not help to heale the schisms and Rents of your Church.  
To which I answer, that if your Church be not the Church of Christ, it will not heal it indeed, for though the Prophets would have healed Babel, it could not be healed.  
You say that Ministers and people will not submit to the Reformation and Government settled by Law.  
It is very like so, if it be not free from Innovations of Popery, because they are sworn to the contrary.  
But you say many doubts will arise in the people's minds, that the Government of your Church is not ordered according to the Word of God.  
To this I answer; If you mean the Church of England's Government, established by the Canon Law. I think it is out of doubt with the most, for they that understand but little, do see and know that that Government is vain and Popish; and that is the reason (as I conceive) why so many refuse to conform to it: and if you fear that that will prove so great a division, you may do well to counsel the Magistrates, to expel all such Government, and to reject all such Synods and counsels, and to labour to understand the mind of God, and to set up his Government over believers in the kingdom of England.  
And whereas you say, that many of the people who yet be not in this Church way, are possessed with these principles (of the independent way) and much looking towards it:  
I say it is pity they should any longer be led about by the way of the wilderness.  
2. You do affirm, that the minds of multitudes of Professors in England, and especially in the City of London, are upon all occasions, very apt to fall to any way in Doctrine or discipline, that is not commonly received by the Church.  
I answer, indeed the proverb is verified upon them. The burned child dreads the fire; for they have been so long deceived by your false glosses, that now their eyes being a little open, the light appeareth very sweet unto them; yea, although they see men but like trees, as the blind man, when his eyes began to be opened, who had been blind from his birth.  
The third thing which you have laid down in this Reason, is; That the Ministers will not be tied, from preaching those points in public, nor from speaking of them in private.  
To which I answer, I hope they will not indeed, for it were their great sin, if they should not declare God's whole council, so far as he hath revealed it unto them.  
But if they would (you say) the people both men and women, are s● strangely bold and pragmatical, and so highly conceited of their way as the kingdom of Christ and the only way of Christ, that out of those principles, they would be drawing many of their friendship and kindred; and many would (say you) come unto them.  
I answer, that this (I hope) you count a virtue, for it is the property of the sheep when they fare well, to call their fellows▪ But hogs will not do so.  
The fourth thing to be minded is (that you say) Liberty, the power of government, and rule, to be in the people, are mighty pleasing to flesh and blood, especially in mean persons, and such as have been kept under.  
To which I answer, that they that have been kept under, have been kept under by the tyranny of the Man of sin; This you confess to be especially the poor, upon whom those Taskemasters have laid the greatest burdens. Therefore for them to affect liberty is no wonder.  
And whereas you say they would have the power and Rule:  
I answer, It is not any power or Rule which is pleasing to the flesh (as you speak, thinking them to be like those Priests, Whose god is their belly, whose glory is their shame, who mind earthly things) but it is the power of Christ which they stand for, as they are members of the Churches of Christ; to which Churches Christ the King thereof hath given all power in spiritual things.  
And that the Church of Christ consisteth of mean persons, is no wonder; for we have learned, that the poor receive the gospel, and you know you have granted, that it stands with the light and Law of Nature, That the liberty, power, and rule, should be in the whole, and not in one man or a few; so that the power must rest in the body▪ and not in the Officers, though the Church be never so poor.  
Now the fifth thing you mind in this Reason is, That toleration will be made use of to strengthen their way.  
And you also conclude, it will be granted, that the ablest Ministers could not answer them, and therefore were content they should have a toleration.  
You do very well to fear the worst, but you had done better if you had armed yourself against them, and answered the Scriptures, they bring by Scripture: But it is a plain case, you could not do that, & therefore your fear was just; but if you were a wellminded man, or a wellmeaning Christian man, you should not have feared the coming of the truth to light, nor have been afraid of reformation, because it would work to your greater divisions, and rents, for Christ came not to set peace upon the earth, (as I have told you before) but the seed of the Serpent will be ever playing his part.  
Thus much for your second Reason.   

IN your third Reason you affirm, That toleration will breed divisions, and schisms, disturbing the peace and quiet of Churches, and towns.  
I answer, I have told you already, we plead for no toleration that shall disturb the peace of Churches or towns.  
Moreover, you say, it will not only do so, but it will also breed divisions in families between husband and wife, brother, and brother.  
To which I answer, There was a division in the first Family that ever was, and brother rose up against brother▪ but toleration was not the cause of it; but the malice of Satan in the seed of the Serpent, as it hath been, and is now at this day.  
And this is according to Christ's words, Luke 12. 52, 53. which saith, That there shall be five in one house, two against three, and three against two, &c. and in Matth. 10. 34, 35, 36. think not (saith he) that I come to send peace into the earth, I came not to send peace, but the sword: For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in Law against her mother in Law, and a man's enemies shall be they of his own household; and moreover, in Luke 21. 16. our Saviour doth declare, that we shall be betrayed, both by parents, and brethren, and kinssolkes, and friends. Now if Christ may be said to be the Author of evil, than you may say that Toleration of true Religion is the cause of this division.  
Again you say, (O how) this will occasion disobedience.  
To this your Lamentation I answer. O that you would remember the rule 
* 1 Tim. 6.  that every servant ought to count his Master worthy of all honour; and in the judgement of charity believe, that persons professing the Gospel will learn that lesson.  
Next you say O! how will this take away that power & authority which God hath given to Husbands, Fathers, and Masters, over wives, children, and servants.  
To this I answer, O! that you would consider the text in 1 Cor. 7. which plainly declares that the wife may be a believer, & the husband an unbeliever▪ but if you have considered this text, I pray you tell me, what authority this unbelieving husband hath over the conscience of his believing wife; It is true he hath authority over her in bodily and civil respects, but not to be a Lord over her conscience; and the like may be said of fathers and masters, and it is the very same authority which the sovereign hath over all his subjects, & therefore it must needs reach to families: for it is granted that the King hath power (according to the Law) over the bodies, goods, and lives of all his subjects; yet it is Christ the King of Kings that reigneth over their consciences: and thus you may see it taketh away no authority which God hath given to them.  
The next thing you say is, that they cannot be certain, that their servants and children sanctify the Lord's day.  
To which I answer, that indeed unbelieving Masters take as little care of this▪ as they that have given liberty to profane the Lord's Day; but believing Parents and Masters, may easily know (if their children or servants be of any Congregation) what their life and conversation is, and therefore this can hinder no duties, or works of Families (as you falsely affirm) nor cross the good and peace of Familes.  
By this you may see, that this your groundless affirmation, is no good Reason against Toleration.  
And therefore the Court of Parliament (to whom you submit for judgement) may easily see that good members both for Churches and commonwealths, may issue out of such Families, that live under Christ's government, and that such Families may be good Nurseries, both for Church and commonwealth.  
Thus much for your third Reason.   

IN your fourth Reason you do affirm, that there will be great danger of disputes amongst you about Government and Worship, and Doctrine, and practices (in the Conclusion) you say, it will be about a question where Saints go when they die, whether to heaven or a third place.  
I Answer, This is a question I never heard amongst the Separates, (or any of those whom you call independent men), but amongst the Papists of Rome, and England.  
The next thing is, about sitting with hats on to break bread?  
I Answer, this may be a question indeed, but not to breed division; for it may be as lawful for one man to sit covered & another uncovered, as it may be lawful for one man to receive it sitting, and another lying in bed. But if any man list to be contentious, the Churches of God have no such custom.  
Thus much for your Fourth Reason.   

IN your fifth Reason you affirm, that the Ministers of the kingdom, can have little assurance, of the continuance of their flocks to them, if such a toleration be granted, but that the tolerated Churches will admit them into fellowship, and increase Churches out of their labours: and that they should do little else but spend and be spent.  
To this I answer, that if you were the Ministers of Christ, as you would be taken to be, it might be your comfort, joy, and glory, for it was the Apostles work to gather the Saints, and to travel in birth of children; and they did not grudge that they were added unto the Churches of Christ, but took care for them being so added, for the care of all Churches lay upon them, and therefore they were as Fathers, and Nurses, unto them; and the gospel admits of no such theft as to steal away members from other Churches: but if men draw near to the truth (which never▪ were members of any Church) and offer themselves to join unto us; we may admit them upon good experience of their life and conversation, for those members that traveled from one Church to another, were commended unto those Churches by Letters from the Church where they were members, or else they could not have been admitted: and thus you may see the way of the gospel admits of no such disorder.  
Now whereas you say▪ that this Toleration upon any light occasion of demanding dues; or preaching against any thing they like not, opens a wide door, and will invite them to desert their Ministers.  
I answer, by demanding of that which you call dues; you may indeed give just occasion, for you may demand for due, that which is not due; as all the Priests of England do. Likewise by preaching of Doctrine, you may give just occasion▪ if you justify the wicked, and condemn the just, and make sad the hearts of those whom God would not have made sad; and then if your people fly from you, you may thank yourselves; but concerning what you count to be your due, I will declare hereafter. 
* For this see the Reply to his answer to their third Reason for Toleration.   
Thus much for your fifth Reason.   

NOw in the beginning of your sixth Reason, you say, that liberty will be an undoubted means and way of their infinite multiplication and increase, even to thirty fouled.  
Truly I think you are afraid, as Pharaoh was, lest the Lords▪ people should grow mightier than you.  
Next you say, if the Parliament could like to have more of the breed of them, and have a delight to have multitudes exempted from the ecclesiastical laws of the Land, &c.  
I answer, it is no disgrace to the Parliament, if they should so delight▪ though never Parliament before had done the like.  
Moreover, you say, they have increased within this nine months, without a toleration, therefore (you conclude) they would multiply much, if they had a toleration, in many, if not in most towns and Parishes; and ●ou say it cannot be helped.  
All this I grant may be; although they have not a Toleration, I think they will increase; for the Taskemasters can lay no heavier burdens upon them, than they have laid already: but though they should increase, it will not be unprofitable, for the increase of believers will be the strength and▪ glory of the kingdom; for they will in all lawful things, be subject to the King's majesty their▪ dread sovereign, and to all the wholesome laws of his Land, and therefore it will be no danger to have (as you say) swarms of them.  
Thus much for your Sixth Reason.   

IN your 7th. Reason you affirm, that it will be very pre●udiciall dangerous 
Pag. 29.  and insufferable to this kingdom, for Saints two, or three, or more, to gather▪ and combine themselves in Church Fellowship, having one ●● power from Christ their immediate head: without expecting warrant from any Governors.  
First▪ whereas you say it will be prejudicial:  
I answer, It can prejudice none in the kingdom, except it be the Priests, and it will be but of a little tithes, which they dare not in conscience pay, because those Jewish Ceremonies are ceased▪ and if they have not Toleration, that will be all one (in that respect▪) for they will rather suffer, then do any thing against conscience.  
Now whereas you say it will be dangerous, and insufferable to the kingdom, both these I deny; for if they were offensive people, two or three or a few could do but little hurt. But they have been proved to be a peaceable people and the suffering of such hath never been dangerous to any Nation▪ but the not suffering of such to live quietly in a Land, or to pass quietly thorough a land, hath brought Judgements upon such Lands.  
Now whereas you seem to imply, that they should ask leave of the Magistrate, to gather and combine themselves into visible Churches, &c.  
I answer, I do not read that any ever asked leave of the Magistrate for such a thing; nor to perform any of the parts of God's Worship or Discipline: and yet you confess that these independent men do petition, to the Parliament for liberty. 
* For this see his Book pag. 5 5.  Now I pray you Master Edw●rds, would you have Magistrates, and Kings, and Princes to have more power over their subjects then over their bodies, estates, and lives? would you have them be Lords over their consciences? I pray you where must Christ reign then? Must he sit at the magistrates footstool? and take what power the Magistrate will give him? (I mean spiritual power of gathering and making Churches) and such laws as the Magistrate will give him leave to have, to rule over them by? Here you thrust Christ into a narrow corner; for you would fain force him to give his glory to some other, and his praise to some graven Image, of your own devising, which he hath said he will not do. 
* Esay 4 2. 8.   
But methinks it were fitter for men of ●our coat, to ground the Government of Christ's Church, upon 〈◊〉 written Word of God, and not upon Statute laws, nor Canon laws, which you call ecclesiastical; for it will be no disparagement to the imperial crown of this realm, for Christ's Church to be governed by Christ's own laws.  
The next thing is, you say, the Oath of supremacy was appointed by 
Pag. 30. li●. 30. 31.  Law for ecclesiastical persons to take.  
Me thinks that was a good consideration, for ecclesiastical persons have been in all ages ready to tyrannize, over Kings and Emperors.  
But now you ask the independent men (as you call them) a question; but before you come to the question, you lay down an affirmation or a conclusion; (namely) That these independent men give power to the Churches.  
To which I answer; If they should do so, they were very ignorant, and very presumptuous, for Christ hath given power to the Churches, and all the Ministers that do administer in the Churches, must have the power by the Church.  
But say you, they give that power to the Churches, which the Papists give unto the Pope.  
I answer, if they do so they are blasphemers for the Papists acknowledge the Pope to be the head of the Church: which title all men ought to give only unto Christ.  
But now to your question; which is, whether they will take the Oath of supremacy, or do acknowledge in their prayers, The King Defender of the Faith? &c.  
To which I answer, This Ooth you say, was ordained for ecclesiastical persons▪ and I hope these ecclesiastical independent men (if I may safely so call them) will ever, both acknowledge, and maintain, that the King is supreme over all the Land▪ therefore over the Church of the Land, though it consist of the clergy, as it appears by that Oath which you say was appointed for the clergy▪  
But whether they do acknowledge the King, defender of the Faith, &c. which is the later part of your Question?  
To this I answer. It is out of all doubt, that these men do desire from their heart, (as well as all the Lord's people) that the King may defend the Faith of Christ Jesus, and daily make their prayers and supplications to God for him, and that in conscience, and obedience to God, being commanded in his Word so to do▪ for they know it is a duty laid upon them; for prayers and supplications must be made for Kings, and all them that be in authority; 
b 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2.  but 〈◊〉 can make axceptable prayers, but the Saints, for the prayers of the wicked are abomination unto the Lord 
c Pro. 15. 8.  But that all Kings have been defenders of the Faith of Christ, I deny; for there is but one Faith, 
* ●ph. 4. 5.  and those that do maintain that true saith of our Lord Jesus Christ, lawfully have that title given them; and none other may lawfully have it but they.  
You will happily say, Queen Mary was not a Defender of the Faith. But I say unto you, if the crown of England give unto Kings and Queens that title; Queen Mary had as much right to the title as Queen Elizabeth. &c.  
Secondly, you say▪ they hold that the imposition of lawful things, doth make them unlawful, (which you say is a strange paradox.) 
Pag. 31. lin. ●●.   
I answer the imposition of lawful things do not make them unlawful, if he that imposeth them have authority so to do: as for example; the i●●osition of an Oath is very lawful; but if it be imposed by him that hath not authority, though it make not the Oath unlawful simply in itself, yet it makes the use of it unlawful, at that time, both to him and to me.  
But as for forms of prayer: which (you say) they do confess to be for order, and lawful in themselves, yet unlawful, being imposed.  
I say, not as you say, they say, for I know no form of prayer lawful in itself, for any of the Lord's people to tie themselves unto; nor that ever was imposed upon any by Christ, or his Apostles; (We read in 1 Tim. 2. 1. 2. that all manner of prayers must be made unto God; and amongst other, supplications must be made for Kings, but there was no form of words given by which we must pray for any: and we are commanded to pray with the Spirit, and to pray with understanding;) but we are commanded to avoid an evil manner of praying; that we should not be like the hypocrites; which love to stand and pray in the Synogogues, 
* Matth. 6. 5  nor that we should make vain repetitions as the Heathens, which think to be heard for their much babbling: 
* Ver. 7. 8.  and as also we are forbidden an evil manner of praying; so we are commanded by God what manner to use, as it is plain in Matth. 6. 9 
Matth. 6. 9   
The manner is that we must in our prayers acknowledge God to be our Father.  
And secondly, That he is in heaven.  
Thirdly, we must give glory to his Name.  
Fourthly, we must pray for the coming of his kingdom.  
Fiftly, we must pray that the Lord's Will may be done, both in 
Ver. 10.  earth and in heaven.  
Sixthly, we must pray for all things necessary for this life, 
Ver. 11.  which is there set forth under the name of daily bread.  
Seventhly, we must pray for the forgiveness of our own 
Ver. 12.  sins; and we are also put in mind, that as we would have our own sins forgiven, so we should forgive others; if they acknowledge their offences, according to that in Luke 17▪ 4▪ If thy brother trespass against thee seven times a day, and seven times a day, end say it repenteth him, &c.  
Eightly, we must pray against temptations to be delivered from 
Ver. 13.  the evils thereof.  
And lastly, we must conclude with thanksgiving acknowledging the kingdom to be the Lords and all power, and glory to be due unto him, not only for that present time, but for ever.  
Here you may see we are taught the manner how we ought to pray, but we are tied to no form of words, yet we are to believe that this is a perfect Rule, and that we may sufficiently ground all the petitions we need to put up from this very rule.  
As for Example.  
As we desire to acknowledge God to be our Father, so we ought to desire, that others would do the like.  
And whereas we ought to pray for the kingdom of God to come, we are not to limit it to this, (that Christ may come to rule in us only) but that-he may rule as a King in the heart of all his chosen.  
Neither ought we alone to acknowledge praises but we ought to desire that praises to God may be acknowledged by others also, and that they may grant the kingdom, and power, and glory to be his, not that he should be a King only to rule in the hearts of men, but also that he may rule and govern the actions of the bodies of men in his outward worship: as we are commanded to glorify God with our bodies and souls, and the reason, is because they are his, 1 Cor. 6. 20. Now, if our bodies and souls be Gods, than it must needs be granted▪ that it is in spiritual worship: for in all civil things it hath been acknowledged already, that both bodies and lives are our sovereign Lord the Kings; in whose Land we dwell.  
Now if there were any form of prayer for men to bind themselves unto, it would have been showed, either in this Scripture, or in some other; which thing you have not yet proved.  
That they were not tied to this form of words is plain by another Evangelist, which doth not use the same words, but addeth some, and leaveth out other some; and also the whole form of thanksgiving, is left out by Luke, (Luke 11. 2. 3. 4. Compared with Matth. 6. 9) and to seek the help of any book but the Bible to teach men to pray, is to disable God which hath promised to give believers his Spirit, whereby they shall cry Abba Father, 
c Rom. 8. 15  and that that Spirit should lead them into all truth, and bring all things to their remembrance 
d Ioh. 14. 26.  Therefore a form of prayer for men to tie themselves unto, cannot be sufficient and pleasing to God though it were never imposed by any.  
Thirdly, you lay another slander upon us, as though we should affirm, that Christian Princes, and Magistrates, who are defenders of the Faith have no more to do in and about the Church, then Heathen Princes.  
This is not true, for we know that Christian Princes, and Magistrates ought to be members of Christ's Church; and so being they may be Officers in the Church; And if they be Defenders of the Faith, they be such as defend the pure worship of God, manifested in his Word, as also the true professors thereof, and that against all tyrannical power that shall attempt to suppress either it or them, as the good Kings of Judah and Israel did, by slaying the Servants and Prophets of Baal who had slain the Lord's people.  
But Heathen Kings cannot be said to be members of the Church of Christ before they know Christ, and then they become Christian Kings. Therefore, to vent upon all occasions, such principles as you see we hold, and maintain, is not (as you say) dangerous and insufferable, neither are the people.  
But you say further, that the people for a great part of them are heady and refractory, and proud, and bitter, and scornful, and despisers of authority, and that they will not suffer public prayers to be prayed, but that by their gesture and threatening of the Ministers, they have laboured to hinder the use of them: And these people (I gather from your own words) are the professors in England, and especially in the city of London; and it is very like to be so; because they were there at the time of your service; (for neither the Separates nor Semiseparates (as you call them) use to be there at the time of your service (for aught I know:) and these Professors you have also called Idle, & busibodies, tatlers also, as it is said, 1 Tim. 5. 13. very wanton in their wits (say you) affecting novelties in Religion, and liking of points that are not established nor commonly held, and these you say are many of the professors▪ 
* For this see the third part of his Answer to their second Reason against Toleration, pag. 30.  And in your second Reason against Toleration, Pag. 24. (you say) that the minds of multitudes of the Professors in England, and especially in this city, are upon all occasions very apt to fall to any way in Doctrine or Discipline that is not commonly received by the Church, &c. But I tell you, you ought not to blame any for withstanding any thing in God's worship, which is not grounded in his Word: Neither (if the whole body of the worship there tendered be the invention of man) ought any of them to be blamed for opposing such a worship; because it is according to their Protestation.  
Yet I justify none that will oppose disorderly, as either by casting up of hats, or threatening the Minister, or any the like unseemly behaviour; for I judge it better for them to depart in peace, if they have not faith in the action performed  
But methinks (Mr. Edward's) you have foully missed it, in that you have thus vilified your brethren, to call them by the names of those mockers which (Paul testified) should come in the last time, that should be heady▪ and high minded, and proud boasters, and despisers of authority; for such as these have not the power of godliness, (and by this you make your Church a foul Church, and defile shrewdly your own nest, and make it appear to all men that you live in a Cage of unclean birds) & therefore you are commanded from such to turn aside; 
* 2 Tim. 3. 5.  if the fear of God be in your heart.  
Moreover, You say, you fear they will not tolerate the Government established by the ecclesiastical, and civil laws; and you would fain father the cause of this your fear upon Separates, and independency, whereas you cannot be so ignorant, but that you must know, that the government established by Law may stand without the leave of Separates, for they have neither power to give toleration, nor to prohibit toleration, for, or against any thing.  
But you say, you would rather pray against toleration, than prophecy of the woeful effe●ts of it.  
I answer, if you can make such a prayer in a time acceptable, then sometimes such prayers will be accepted which are not grounded upon God's Word.  
But of the woefullest effects of toleration, you have prophesied already; in that you say, they will withstand your Doctrine and your dues, 
* For this see his fif● Reason against Toleration. pag. 28. lin. 12. 13.  and that will be a woeful effect indeed! when you shall be driven, to cry out, Alas, alas, that great city Babylon, for in one hour is so great wealth come to desolation.  
Thus much for your Seventh Reason.   

IN your Eight Reason, you affirm, That these independent men, where they have power, as in New-England, will not tolerate any Churches or Government, but in their own way.  
In using the word these, you carry the matter so darkly, that I know not whom you mean, for you have named none.  
But you seem to say, they be men that have power in New England.  
I answer, indeed it may happen to be so; That there may be some men there, that take upon them authority, to bind men's consciences, as you and all your fellows do here. But if it have been so, I think it was, because they had (here in England) taken upon them an oath of conformity, (as you have sometimes done;) and because the tyranny of the prelates was so mighty, against all good men, that they were fain to go away privately, and so had not time or opportunity publicly to disclaim this their Oath; and then there might be fear, that upon complaint made for disorder committed there, in suffering the liberty of the Gospel there which could not be admitted here, they might have been sent for back by their Ordinaries, and so have been committed▪ to some stinking prison, here in London, there to have been murdered▪ as divers of the Lord's people have been, of these late years, as I am able to prove of my own knowledge; and if they have banished any out of their Parents, that were neither disturbers of the peace, of the Land, nor the worship practised in the Land, I am persuaded, it was their weakness, and I hope they will never attempt to do the like. But I am still persuaded, they did it upon the same ground, that having knowledge in themselves, that their former Oath, might be a snare unto them, if they did not hold still some correspondency with the practice of England, even till God should open a way or means for them to seek free liberty for all, by the approbation of authority.  
The next thing you mind against them is, that they would not admit liberty, to some of their brethren, which were godly Ministers▪ though they did approve of them, as being against Ceremonies.  
To this, 1. I answer, that it is strange that any man should send to ask their liberty. 2. It is much more strange to me (if it be true, as you say, that these men were against Ceremonies) that there should be any difference between them, and the Ministers in New England.  
But it seems (by your speech) they would have gone in a middle way, which presupposeth to me, that they are so far from being against Ceremonies, that are already invented, that they would have set up some invention of their own.  
The next thing you charge some of them with, is, That they would not admit into fellowship, those that would not enter into their Covenant, and profess faith, and submit to their Church Orders, though they would be of their Church  
Me thinks you have strange evasions, but I pray you answer me to these two questions: the first is, how men of years of discretion, may (by the rule of God's Word) be admitted into fellowship, and not profess their faith.  
Secondly, how men may be accounted, to be of the Church, and not submit unto the orders of the Church: Seeing that the Apostle Paul had these two things to rejoice in; the beholding of the Saints steadfast faith, and comely order, in the Church.  
But you say, that these men who would fain have a toleration in this great kingdom, will not allow any in their small particular Congregations.  
Truly (Mr. Edwards) It were good for you to labour to understand the mind and will of God for yourself, and have charity towards your brethren; and hope well, that they have so much knowledge, of the Lord's will, that they will not plead for such an absurdity, as to set up one Church, within another, and so make a schism. But the Toleration they plead for, is that Gods true worship, may be set up in the kingdom▪ by those that understand what it is; and that by the sufferance of the Governors; and that it should be settled in a peaceable way; which would be far from disturbing the peace of three kingdoms, (as you invectively speak;) but to set up a Congregation in a Congregation, would be confusion, even as to set up one kingdom▪ within another.  
The next thing you charge them with, is, that they are partial; (by a supposition of your own:) for you say, it is ordinary for men, when they are not in place, nor have no power in Church or commonwealth; and hold also Do●rines and principles contrary to what is held and established; to plead for Toleration; but when the same men come to have place and power (say you) they will not tolerate others; and you say, that you do believe that these are the men, which now endeavour a toleration.  
To this I answer, you may do well to let this belief of yours be no Article of your faith, because it stands upon no ground; for though a man may hope the best, and fear the worst; yet he may believe nothing but what he hath proof for. But I do believe that all this is your evil surmising, (to think, that if they had power in their hands to settle a Government, they would tolerate none but their independent way,) as it may plainly appear by the Protestation Protested, which you quote here for your Author, for though the Protestor declare what he would have for the Churches of the Saints; yet he doth not take upon him to determine, what Government or rule, shall be set up in the Land, to bring men out of darkness to light, but leaveth that to the judgement of them which have the power, even the King and Parliament.  
Thus much for your Eight Reason.   

IN your ninth Reason you affirm, that toleration may he demanded, upon the same grounds, for Brownists, Anabaptists, and Familists, and others, who profess it is their conscience.  
To which I answer; That seeing you plead for them, I may well hold my peace. But I think the Familists will not ask liberty for toleration if they be as (I do conceive) of the Sect of the Libertines mention in the Acts.  
But, say you, these may be pleaded for upon better grounds than semiseparates, and the Reason you say is, because they deny the truth of your Church.  
Answer, I do believe, those (whom you call semiseparates) do deny the truth of your Church also; (though not in all respects) and so far as they be Separates, they must needs deny the Church from which they Separate.  
But you here demand, whether Papists may not petition and have hope▪ for toleration, seeing it is their conscience.  
To this I answer, I know no reason why they may not petition and hope to speed also, seeing they have many friends in the kingdom.  
Further, you add, that if one sort may have an exemption from the Religion established, why not others?  
I answer. There may be many reasons given, why those may not have freedom (of any great resorts in the Land) which have often attempted, by plots, and treachery to ruinate the Land.  
The next thing you affirm, is, if ever the door of toleration, should be but a little opened, there would be great crowding in.  
To this I answer, That the more good men do embrace the whole truth of God, the better it will be, but there have been too many crowders and creepers in in all ages; and we may justly fear it will be so still; for the Text saith, in the 2 Pet. 2. 2. That many shall follow their destruction, and some of them shall do it through covetousness, who shall with feigned words make merchandise of the Lord's people (as is plain in the next verse) whose destruction sleepeth not. But who these creepers in be, appears by the 15. verse of this Chapter, That they were they that loved the wages of unrighteousness as Balaam did: But if any one so do, his last end shall be worse' then his beginning.  
Thus much for your ninth Reason.   

IN your Tenth Reason, you affirm, That the first principle of the independent way, is, That two or three Saints wheresoever, or by what means soever they do arise; separating themselves from the world into the fellowship of the gospel, are a Church truly gathered: for this you quete Mr. Robinson's justification, pag. 221.  
But in that page there is no such thing written, as I can find, but seeing it cometh so near the truth, we need not to contend about it. For I do affirm, that a company of Saints, Separated from the world, and gathered into the fellowship of the gospel (by what means so ever it be, that matters not, so it be by the teaching of the son of God, according to that in Heb. 1. 1.) these Saints (I say) separating themselves, and being gathered into the fellowship of the gospel (though they combine themselves without the warrant of the governors) are a true Church, and have right to all God's Ordinances, not only 
Matth. 18. 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. Rev. 21. 27. and 22, 14, 15.  to admit men into fellowship, but also to admonish, to reprove and to cast out of their society all obstinate offenders amongst them that do transgress, either against the first or second Table; having (as hath been said before) the Spirit of God to guide them, and wisdom from above to judge of persons, and causes, within the Church, though they have nothing to do to judge those that are without.  
And this doth not make way for Libertisnime, for Heresies and Sectaries (as you say) neither doth it make men to run from their own Ministers, because they restrain them from sin, or keep them to God's Ordinances, (as you do affirm) for if any separate for any such cause, they shall not be received into fellowship, nor justified of any of the Lord's people.  
But the way of the gospel, as hath been plainly proved, is not to live without God's Ordinances, nor to live at liberty (as you say) except you mean the liberty wherein Christ hath set them, and commanded them to stand fast, because he hath made them free, Gal. 5. 1. By this you may see the Saints are called into liberty; but not a liberty to sin (as you would insinuate) but to be freed from the yoke of bondage, which is the tyranny, or tyrannical government of the Canon laws, either of Rome or England.  
But you say, all heretics, Sectaries, or libertines will count themselves Saints, as well as the independent men; and the reason you seem to give for this, is, because the Ministers, and magistrates of the kingdom, shall not have power to determine who be Saints. 
* Pag. 34.   
Now let all men judge what a weighty argument this is, who is he that knows any thing & knows not this, that the Priests in England which are the Bishops creatures, do generally justify the wicked, and condemn the just, and are not these meet men to judge Saints? they justify none that will not be conformable, and yield unto the traditions which they have invented, in their counsels and Convocations; though they have not one title of God's Word to warrant them; Furthermore, they condemn all that will not submit, to their devised worship, even in all the traditions thereof: and this is the dependency which they have brought all men unto, both high and low, even to be subject to their wills, which is a Law.  
But now touching the Magistrate, you would seem to infer that he should have no more power than a Priest.  
It is plain, the Priests have no power, but what they have by permission, and sufferance▪ though they have dependency upon the Pope himself, but the Magistrate hath power given him of God by whom he is set up, for the praise of those that do well and for the punishment of evil doers, and hath the same rule given him (whereby to judge them) that God hath given to his Church; especially Christian Magistrates, notwithstanning they are opposed, yet they have power given of God; as you may read in Acls 7 35. This man Moses whom they forsook saying, who ma●e thee a Prince and a judge, the same God sent for a Prince and a deliverer: and this is he which was as a God unto Aaron; when Aaron was as the mouth of Moses to the people, Exod. 4. 16. Now if you Priests could have proved yourselves as Aaron, than you might have been assistants to Godly Magistrates to deliver the Lord's people out of the hands of tyrannical Princes; but contrariwise, you add afflictions as Pharaoh's Taskemasters 
Exod. 5. 17.  did; even you (Mr. Edward's) when you say the Lord's people are wanton-witted and idle, when they desire to have liberty to serve God.  
And thus you sit in the consciences of men; judging zeal to be hypocrisy; but the time will come, when every work shall be brought to judgement.  
And now drawing near to an end of this Answer to your tenth Reason (which is the last of this your joined army) it is good to look back a little, and consider what hath been said.  
You have spoken much for dependency; but upon whom you do depend, I cannot tell;  
You labour to bring men into doubts, by your suppositions, but you do not make any conclusion, which is God's way, that men fearing God, may expect a blessing when they walk in it, but you cry out for dependency, upon counsels, and Synods, and Churches; I pray you what dependency hath the Church of England upon any other Church? for I suppose you will say, that all the Land is but one Church.  
If you say, that you have dependency, upon the Church of Rome; I do believe you; for the Bishop of Canterbury hath said so much, in his book, where he confesseth, Rome to be as leprous Naaman, and England to be the same Naaman cleansed.  
Now that it is the same, may easily be proved, by divers of your own Authors. But you in your Epistle, affirm, it is not cleansed, in that place, where you say, that there is yet Altars and Images, brazen Serpents, abused to Idolatry, with divers other things, which you would have purged out.  
By this it appears, that it is the same with Rome, in the very nature of it▪ though not in every Circumstance, and this (for any thing can be discerned) is the dependency, for which you plead: even the dependency and affinity, between Rome and England.  
Therefore you should rather have said, That in the belly of this dependency, doth lurk all liberty, and heresy, and whatsoever, Satan, and the corrupt hearts of men have a pleasure to broach. For in that way, it is too common, for men to broach their own pleasures; for their Religion is made of men's inventions.  
Thus much for your 10th. Reason.    

YEt furthermore, (for addition to these ten Reasons, you add a Question; 
* Pag. 34.  your Qeustion is, what these men would have in this Toleration, Whether the number of five or six Congregations only, and no more? Or whether the number shall be left undetermined, and be free to multiply? &c.  
For answer to this, I do affirm, that the number ought not to be limited, for the Churches of the New Testament were free, to multiply, not only in greatness, but also in number. I say they were left free by God; for the Apostles were not limited, from constituting Churches wheresoever men were brought to believe in Christ.  
But say you, it is their principles to break one Church in two or three.  
I answer, I know no man that holdeth any such principle.  
But say you, it hath been so at Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and London.  
To this I answer, I deny not, but that there may be offences taken, and sometimes given, which may cause men to depart one from another (as Paul and Barnabas did) sometimes about persons, and sometimes about things; and woeful experience teacheth all men, that brethren are apt to fall out by the way; and that Joseph knew very well, when he admonished his brethren to the contrary. 
* Gen. 45. 24.  But though some should be offended, and could not be reconciled, (as the Scripture saith, a brother offended, is harder to be won than a strong city 
* Pro. 18. 19 ) yet the departing of such a brother, (or breth●en) cannot make that Church two Churches, yet notwithstanding this may sometimes tend to the further spreading of the gospel, even as the departing of Paul and Barnabas did. Not that I justify the practice of any that are not apt to bear, but that God doth sometimes, bring good out of evil, (as it was in the selling of Joseph, 
* Gen. 50. 20.  by turning it to his own glory, and the good and comfort of his people.  
Therefore you need not to marvel. which shall be the state approved by the Magistrate; because that properly, there remaineth but one entire state, (in such cases of division, as you have before mentioned.) By all this it appears that it is none of our principles to break one Church into two or three.  
But you say, if the number be left undetermined, there may be many Churches in a town.  
For answer whereof, I must tell you, that I read in the Scriptures of no more Churches in a town, but one, as in Jerusalem where there were many Converts, yet I read but of one Church.  
Now this was in the first plantation of the gospel, but what they might increase to afterward, the Scripture is silent in, for any thing I know.  
But that there may be two or three in one place (as you say) that seemeth unto me to be confusion, except they should meet in one place for consultation, which may very well be, for God is the God of Order and not of confusion.  
And I never read in the Scripture, that two Churches met together in one place, for the practice of public worship.  
But say you; we may have, everywhere, three or four men; of an opinion differing from others, to go to make a Church.  
To this I answer, If you mean (by everywhere) in every town of the Land, I say, although it should be so, (and though there be six towns in a Parish) yet it will be no no confusion; for the fewer they are together the less ground will there be of fearing them.  
But touching divisions and subdivisions.  
If any such thing happen, it is but that which we have been told on before. The Apostles words are these, They went out from us, because they were not of us, &c. 
* 1 Ioh. 2. 19  and if evil minded men, that crept in departed from Christ, 
* Ioh. 6. 66. 67.  we need not to think much, that such creepers in, should depard from us also; yet the disorderly going away of any (as I have said before) doth not make them a Church which go away disorderly.  
And thus I have given you an answer to your second tenth Reason, 
* I pray thee (good Reader) take notice, that here I acknowledge an ove●sight (in taking Mr. Edward's his eleventh Reason, to be a second tenth Reason) it was th●ough my neglect, in not looking into his Errata.  for in your book you have by your stile made it a Reason, though you seemed at the first entrance into it to make it but a question.  
But before you conclude the whole, you subjoin to these, the Answer to five or six things (which you would make to be their reasons) and you say that they are continually alleged, by them for their toleration, in this kingdom.  

THe first Reason (you say they bring) is, that toleration is no more, than the French, and Dutch enjoy, who live among us.  
Indeed that is a very good reason, for methinks it stands with equity, that Natives borne, should have as much privilege as Strangers.  
But you would seem to alter the state of the case, in six respects.  
First, That the French and Dutch Protestants have nothing, nor desire nothing, as contra distinct to the Protestants of France and Holland.  
I answer, if the Protestants of France, and Holland, have liberty of their conscience, and be not at all burdened, with Jewish, Popish, or Heathenish Observations, but may be free there, to worship God, according to his Will, revealed in his Word, than they that are here (amongst us) need not to seek more liberty, and I am sure the independent men will ask no more.  
Secondly, you say, that this liberty, was granted, by our Pio●s Princes, in the times of persecution to the Protestants.  
Here you cross your first respect, for if these Protestants were persecuted in France, than it is certain their Religion was different, from the state of their own Nation; for you say they could not enjoy their Religion at home.  
Furthermore you add, that it hath been kept ever since, for a refuge to the persecuted Protestants.  
To which I answer, The very like may be said of the liberty granted to the English Church in Amsterdame, which hath been a refuge for the Protestants which have been persecuted out of England ever since.  
But (you say) we may enjoy our Religion in this Land, and that by the authority of the King and Parliament.  
If it be so: I pray you what is the meaning, of the bleating of such cattle, as yourself? which cry out daily to the King and Parliament▪ for the suppression of the Lord's people; and for the hindering of their meetings.  
Thirdly, you say, The French and Dutch Churches will willingly be joined in Government, and in one way of discipline with the kingdom, if there be a Reformation.  
Indeed if you had not added a great If, here you had told a loud untruth, but if this were performed, that there were a Reformation, according to God's Will, I doubt not but the independent men would do the like.  
Fourthly, you say these Churches do not hold our principles, but do admit of appeals in great businesses.  
I answer, I have told you already, and I now tell you again, that I admit of appeals also, such as the Scripture warrants, and I have declared at large what appeals they be. 
* For th●t read the Answer to his third Reason against independency.   
Fifthly, you say, they be strangers different in Language, and have little acquaintance with you (keeping themselves for the most part among themselves) and therefore (say you) there will be the less danger of drawing away the people.  
I answer, if they differ so little from you, as you would make the world believe, there were small cause of danger, or schism, if they will willingly be joined (as you said before) in Government, and in one way of discipline with the kingdom.  
Further, you add, that they vent no principles, against your Church, and Government.  
I answer, indeed▪ if they should never open a mouth to speak, yet their practice makes them different from you, both in worship and government; and yet it may be upon better considerations, they may draw nearer to the rule hereafter●; but for my part I leave them, as being partly ignorant of their practice.  
But you say, they will not admit your people to be members of their Congregations.  
Answer, indeed I do not know that ever they have refused any; but this much I know; that some English people, that have the French, and Dutch tongue, have, and do go thither to hear; but that any should desire to go thither to hear, that have not the language, were very absurd.  
Sixthly, There, is (say you) a great reason, and necessity, of allowing them Churches and places to preach, and be by them●●lves, and the reasons you yield, are (1) because many of them understand not English at all, and (2) for the benefit of strangers of their own Religion.  
To which I answer, The very same may be said concerning the English Churches in Holland.  
But further you add, that they may well be allowed some Discipline among themselves, in respect they maintain all their own poor.  
Methinks (Mr. Edward's) there should be much more reason, that the English Protestants, or Separates, should be tolerated, for the same cause, for they maintain all their own poor also. And furthermore, they maintain the poor of the Church of England; yea, in every parish where their dwelling houses stand, they pay to the poor weekly, as well as any other man.  
They also pay their money for the maintenance of the Visited Houses in the Parishes where they dwell.  
Nay, furthermore, they pay also their money for the maintenance of the Priests of England, (the more is the pity) and so I fear the Dutch and French do also, yea though the Priests are as Popish as they were in Q●eene Mary's time. And this is well known to all Landlords that do let them houses, for if they know them to be Separates, and that they will not, have to do with the Priests in the pay meant of that they call dues, they make their Tenant pay the more rent, for if the Tenant will not the Landlord must. And by this you may see, their burdens are double to other men's; in that they must maintain their own poor and their own Ministers, and the Church of England's also.  
And by this you may see▪ that you have not (in the least) altered the state of the case, between the Dutch, and French, and us, in the causes before mentioned.  
Therefore this their first reason for toleration lies yet unanswered by you.   

FOr answer to their second Reason, which (you say) is that they seek no more than is granted them, in Holland; your answer to it is this,  
That if that be a good ground, then Jews and Anabaptiss may have a toleration also.  
To this I answer, For my part I speak for myself, and I suppose, that they may say as much for themselves (in these late respects, which you have mentioned) as the Separates do, for they maintain their poor, and their Ministers, and the poor, and the Priests of the Church of England, as well as we. And I think they are persecuted and hunted also; but I will leave them to plead for themselves.  
Further, you add, That such a Toleration is not fit, neither in Divinity, nor in policy.  
I answer, I know no true divinity that teacheth men to be Lords over the conscience; and I think it is no part of Godly policy, to drive the King's subjects out of the land, because they desire free liberty to worship God in the Land according to his will; the States of Holland are counted politic, and yet they esteem it the Strength of their kingdom, to grant free liberty of conscience.  
Secondly, you say, there may be a toleration for us in Holland, with much more safety to the government established, then can be here, because the people understand not our language; and also have little, or no relation to us of kindred and friendship, &c.  
I answer, I must say to you, as I have said already, that there was never any danger to a kingdom, to suffer the Lord's people to live quietly, and enjoy their liberty.  
Thirdly, you say, The people of the Holenders are generally industrious, and mind their business, and keeping to what is established by their laws, not troubling their heads so much with other points of Religion.  
By this one may easily perceive your mind (Mr. Edward's) with the rest of your fellows, and also know, that you are naturally derived from Rome, in that you would have all men, to content themselves, with an implicit faith▪; and to take for granted, what government your laws alloweth, and what worship your inventions have hatched; and not to search the the Scripture at all.  
Further you add here, that the people in England are not so, especially in this city of London and great towns, you say many of the professors, are more idle, and busy▪ bodies, tatlers also, as it is said, 1 Tim. 5. 13. very wanton also in their wits, affecting novelties in Religion, &c.  
Now truly (Mr. Edwards) if you were of my mind, and were a member of such a Church, that had such members in it; you would be so far from fearing, of being beguilded of them, that you would be very glad to have such birds taken out of your nest. But you are so far from observing the rule of Christ (Matth. 18. 15.) that is to tell your brother of his fault between him and you that you rather walk with slanders and elamours, vilifying your own mother's sons; so that every good man may be ashamed of you.  
Fourthly, you say, that Holland tolerates us and many others, but it is more upon grounds and necessity of worldly respects, because of the benefit of exsise towards the maintenance of war.  
Now (Mr. Edwards) you have utterly overthrown your own Argument, laid down in the beginning of your answer to this their second Reason, for than you said, it was against the rule of policy; but now you say it is their policy.  
And whereas you would make the case different between England and Holland.  
I answer, It is not different at all; for England hath the Subjects purses to maintain wars as well as Holland; and though it be not in exsise for victuals, yet it is in some other ways from which the subjects of Holland are freed.  
The next thing you affirm, is; That your riches and strength, standeth in one way of Religion.  
To which I answer, I think (if I could understand your mind herein) you mean the riches and strength of the Priests: for I am sure the riches, and strength of the kingdom, may stand best with Toleration, as it may appear, partly by what hath been said already, for you have heard that the Lord's people (whom you thus persecute) maintain their own poor.  
And it will also be made appear, that they pay Scot, and Lot, in the kingdom, in all civil respects, and are all as true subjects to the King's Majesty, and are ready to do him all faithful service with their bodies, and estates, as any in the kingdom.  
But I confess that toleration would be neither riches nor strength to the Priests, for it is sore against the people's will▪ that they pay them any thing now; and it will be no wonder when it shall be made to appear, what the Priests wages i●, 
* See the Reply tothe sixth part of his Answer to this their following Reasou.  but that shall be done hereafter.   

THeir third Reason you say is, That if they have not liberty to erect some Congregations, it will force them to leave the kingdom.  
For answer whereof, you do affirm (in the first place) that there is no need of a toleration for them; neither that they should leave the kingdom for conscience, and that you say will appear by the Reasons and principles which they do agree to, which you say are these;  
First, that they hold your Churches true, your Ministers true, Ordinances true: Further you say they can partake with you in your Congregations in all Ordinances, even to the Lord's Supper.  
To which I answer, indeed here you would make the Readers believe, that they had opened a wide gap, (if they should take your affirmation, without your provisal) but you come to help yourself handsomely, in that you say their condition was, that it must first be provided, that scandalous and ignorant persons must be kept back, and ceremonies must be removed.  
Methinks, this is a mighty great mountain, that stands between them▪ and you, and therefore you have small cause, to ask them wherefore they should desire, to set up Churches? fortill this mountain be removed, they may be true to their own principles, and not go from their word, and yet never communicate with you, either in worship, or government.  
For first, If you keep out all scandalous persons, out of all the Churches in England, from the Sacraments, and all ignorant persons; truly than your Churches will be as empty as ours.  
Secondly, If you should remove away all your Ceremonies, (which is the second part of your reformation,) you could not tell how to worship; for your whole form and manner of worship is made of invented Ceremonies.  
But if you can procure such a reformation, to have your Church all consist of persons of knowledge, fearing God, and ●ating covetousness, & void of all other scandals (so far as we can judge by the Scripture) and that the Ceremonies may be removed, and we enjoy (as you brag) all God's Ordinances with you, as well as in our own Churches, than you shall hear, what I will say to you, as well as the independent men.  
But till all this be done, you see there is still good reason, for good men, either to desire liberty, or to leave the kingdom.  
Further, you say, some of them could take the charge of parochial Churches amongst you, upon the Reformation.  
I Answer, indeed such a Reformation, which you have formerly mentioned, will hardly stand with parochial Churches.  
But you say, they could yield to presbyterial Government, by Classes and Synods; so they might not be enjoined to submit to it, as Jure Divino.  
To which I answer. It seems (by your own confession) that they do deny the presbyterial government by Classes, and Synods, to be from God, as it appears, in that you say, they will not submit to it, as Iure Divino, and therefore you have overthrown yourself (in all this your reasoning) with your Synods and Classes also; so that still there remains good grounds to seek a Toleration, that the Saints may grow into bodies even in this Land.  
But to grow into one body with you (as you would have them) while your church's body is like a Leopard, and all bespotted, (as appears by your words) were very absurd; for you ●●●e affirm, that the best of your members▪ even the Professors, especially of London, and of the great towns in England; are very f●●le; yet I hope you will confess, that they are the best of your members; then if it be true (as you say) that you must remove in your Reformation, all ignorant and scandalous persons▪ by your grounds, you should have but a very few to make a Church of as well as we. For you must remove also all your Professors, which you say are so scandalous.  
Therefore, I should rather counsel you to repent of all your evils that you have done, and be reconciled to God the Father, and Christ his son, and separate yourselves from all your wickedness, and even come and grow up into one body with us.  
Secondly, you say, Seeing your Churches, Ministers, and Ordinances be true, the erecting of new, and withdrawing from such Congregations, can never be answered to God.  
I answer, Here you take for granted that which you cannot prove, and it is your wisdom so to do, for by that means; you may make simple people believe▪ that you are very right, except a few defects, which no man shall be freed from, while he is in this life.  
But now to the point; and first, touching your Churches and Ministers, which you say be true, and you also say, the independent men would grant them to be true, upon a Reformation, such as the Word requires.  
I tell you for answer, that this your juggling will not help you, for no man is bound to take your bare word, therefore it is good you make proof of that which you have said.  
But before you go to prove your Churches true, declare unto me what Churches you mean? for I ever took the whole Land of England to be but one Church, (as it stands established by the Canon Laws) and that all the Parishes in the Land make up but one entire body, therefore what is amiss in one Parish, all the whole are guilty of, and it will be laid to the charge of the Archbishops, who are the Metropolitans, or chief Priests over the Church of the Land. Seeing it is so, you must stand out to maintain your Church, and you need not to trouble yourself about your church's for I know no dependency you have upon any, except it be Rome, according as I have told you before in the conclusion of my answer to your first tenth Reason against independency. Therefore this is the Church that you must maintain, even the Church of England, established by the Canon Laws, consisting of Archbishops, Diocesan Bishops, with all the rest of that erew; for this is indeed both your Church and Ministry, which doth appear by your own ground, because you affirm, that in this part lieth all the power: but (by your own grounds) the whole body of the Land. (I mean of the laity (as you call them) hath no power at all to reform any abuse: therefore this Clergy must needs be your Church; and thus you make yourselves the head, and body, and all the rest of the Land the ●ayle to follow after you.  
Now if you can prove this to be a true Church, which hath neither ground, nor footing in Christ's Testament, you will work wonders: but indeed such wonders have been wrought by you; for all the world▪ hath wondered, and run after the beast, saying, Who is like unto him? and who is able to make war with him? as you may plainly see in the 13. of the Reveation. 
Rev. 13.  Therefore they that do justify such a Church; are such as have been deceived by her false miracles, even by the fire which she hath made to come down from heaven.  
I pray you did not fire come down from heaven in Queen Mary's time, and devour the Saints in Smithfield; if you understand heaven in that place, as I understand it (to be the seat of the Magistrate) you must grant the same, for they are called Gods, and the children of the most high.  
For your forefathers did (as Pila● did) wash their hands from the blood of the Saints, and of the innocent, and turned them over, for their sentence of condemnation, to the Secular power, which you made your horns, and your heads pushed them forward to execute your bloody cruelty; and thus you may see that fire came down from heaven, in the sight or apprehension of men for most that beheld it thought it was just, because it was the sentence of the Magistrate.  
And by this all men may see, that you of the clergy are the 
Whence the Church of England is derived. Whence the Church of Rome is derived.  Church of England, and that this Clergy came from Rome, and that therefore your Church is derived from Rome.  
Now if you would know whence the Church of Rome was derived; I conceive that her power was derived from the beast with seven heads, which rose up out of the sea, as you may read of in the thirteenth of the Revelations, for there both those beasts are mentioned▪ and also the Image of the first beast, which the second beast hath caused to be made, which is even here in England amongst us; and you may see I have proved unto you already what it is; as you may also read in the 15. verse of that Chapter, it was that to whom the beast gave a spirit, and also he gave it power that it should speak, and cause as many as would not worship the Image of the beast, to be killed, and hath not this Image caused abundance to be killed in England, and hath not he caused all to receive his mark, or his name, or the number of his name; and they that have it not, may neither buy nor sell, as it is apparent by the testimony of the Scripture itself, and woeful experience.  
And is not this Image the Church that now you ●leade for? which consisteth of all the Priests of England; if it be not, I 
What the Image of the first beast is.  pray you tell me what it is?  
But if this be it (as it appears it is) than these are your Ministers also; and than it hath been proved plainly, whence this your Church and Ministry came. And that any of understanding should grant this Church, and Ministry to be a true Church and ministry, would bewray great ignorance in them.  
Further you add, that they acknowledge the Ordinances to be true.  
In this I do believe you upon your bare word, for it is a truth, if you mean God's Ordinances which you have amongst you.  
As first, you have the Scripture but you wring it and wrest it, according to your own devices, and make of it a nose of wax, and a leaden rule to lean which way your mind leadeth you; and though you ought to take that reed or rod in your hand, at all times (if you were God's messengers) to measure both the Temple and the Altar and the worshippers, (Rev. 11. 2, yet you have not learned that skill, (for your Church and ministry holdeth no correspondency with that measuring line.) but contrariwise you have taken that golden cup▪ and filled it full of abominations; ●ay, you have hacked it and mangled it to pieces, and made it into little lessons, which you call your Epistles and gospels & they are Dedicated to your Saints, upon your Saints-Dayes; and thus you may see though you have the Scriptures (which is the Word of God) and take upon you to unfold the mysteries thereof, yet in stead of that, you darken the truth by false glosses.  
Secondly, you have the Sacraments, even baptism, and breaking of bread: but you pervert them both, to your own destruction; nevertheless they still remain God's Ordinances, even as the golden vessels, were God's vessels, when they were in Babel though Bels●azar made them his qua●●ing bowls▪ yet still they remained to be God's vessels. Even so did Circumcision remain God's Ordinance though it was with Ierobo●●. The like may be said of baptism▪ it still remains God's Ordinance, though it be carried away with back●sliding Antichristians (even the Apostate fallen states) and so you may read in the eleventh of the Revelation, ver. 2. that the court must be left out, and be unmeasured; and the reason was because it was given to the Gentiles, even to them that should tread down the holy city for 42. months; this court we know, belonged to the Temple (as you may read in the 42. of Ezekiel) and had in it the Ordinances belonging to the people. And although you have baptism, and the Lord's Supper they will not sanctify you; though they may be sanctified to the use of them amongst you which are God's people, according to the election of grace.  
And though you have some of God's Ordinances, amongst you; yet you have added unto them many Ordinances of your own devising, which doth utterly debar the Lord's people, which have knowledge of them, from communicating with you in any worship.  
As for example,  
How shall any man partake with you of the word preached in your assemblies but he must needs partake also with the false calling of the Priest, by which it is preached, for none else are suffered to preach amongst you, (by your leave or approbation,) but they that preach by that false power.  
And who shall receive the Sacraments with you, and not justify your devised service-book? for all your things are administered by that. And as all the Lords Ordinances ought to be sanctified by the Word of God and prayer: So on the contrary you labour to sanctify your things, by the stinted service-book; and therefore the withdrawing from you, may be answered to God.  
Further you bear the world in hand, that you have but something amongst you wanting yet, that were to be desired, and therefore you say there is no cause to leave the kingdom, nor for private men to set up true Churches.  
Answer, Indeed If your Church & Ministers could be proved true (which you see is a thing unpossible) than it had been needless (as you say) to leave the Land; but neither is your Church nor Ministers true, nor can the Ordinances be had amongst you without sin: and that this is the judgement of the independent men, is plain by your former confession; Where you affirm, they will not hear of growing into one body (or communicating) with you before a Reformation; neither submit to your Classes or Presbyters, as Jure Divino,  
But in the next place you say, the setting up of divided Churches, would be to the scandal of all the Churches, and not the giving of scandal to one brother, but to ten thousands of Congregations.  
Truly (Mr. Edwards) you overshoote yourself (in that you make yourself such an apparent dissembler) for you would make men believe, that you desire to keep your Church and brethren unspotted, and yet you yourself with your own tongue, have most foully scandalised the chief members of your Church, making them so foul a people, that they ought not to be communicated with. 
* In the Second Part of his second Reason against toleration, pag. 24. In his sixth Reason against toleration pag. 29. and the third part of his Answer to their second Reason for toleration.   
Further, your words imply that so long as a man is not put upon the practice of that which is unlawful, he may bear.  
I tell you again that your whole manner is unlawful, and therefore all the Lord's people, as they desire to be blessed and to be found walking in God's waves have cause to separate from your Church▪ and to practise God's Ordinances among themselves, as well as they who are separated already, (which you here you call Brownists) and the grounds and causes be so great, that they may well be justified.  
But you would have conscious men to consider Mr. Robinson, concerning circumstantial corruptions; you say, he shows it is not an intolerable evil, for evil men be suffered in the Church, &c. yet you confess he affirms it to be an evil.  
Two things are here to be minded.  
First, that you would still please yourself with this, that you have a true Church (though corrupted) which hath been proved contrary.  
Secondly, that you would justify your Church by the sins of others.  
But you know what Mr. Robinson saith, That the government instituted by Christ is not only neglected or violated in the Church of England, but the plain contrary to it is established by Law.  
But you say, now supposing your Reformation, it will be otherwise with England, then when he writ.  
But (you may see) it is very plain, that the cruelty, and wickedness, of the Church of England hath increased ever since that time.  
You say there is but something neglected, and you would make it the want of some Law to suppress evil men.  
To which I answer, That your Canon laws be evil laws, and your Lawmakers evil men, and therefore it could not stand with their principles to make laws to suppress evil men.  
Thirdly, you say, that they (whom you call independent) live in and are members of such Churches, and yet they think it unlawful, to forsake them.  
I pray you, have any of them told you, that their Churches be like the Church of England? you must make proof thereof, for in this I will not take you upon your bare word.  
Further, you say they want some parts of Government and Officers, appointed by Christ, more matertally than will be in your Church, upon a Reformation.  
I answer, I have plainly proved to you: that Christ's Church hath his Government, and Officers; but your Church hath neither Christ's Government nor Officers. But what it will be upon the Reformation▪ I cannot tell.  
But you say, they must want the Ordinances, or else they must have them with instruments without ordination.  
I answer This is untrue as hath been proved at large, in the answers to one of your former Reasons against independency.  
But you say you would have them hear with the defects in your Church, and wait till God give you more light.  
I answer I know no●e that interrupteth you, for we will neither meddle with your Idols, nor with your Gods if you would but suffer us to worship our God, after the way that you call heresy.  
The next thing you say is that they tell you that something may be omitted for a time, and that affirmatives bind not always and that the exercise of Discipline may be forborn for a time, when it will not be for edification to the Church, but for destruction; and therefore you question them for not incorporating themselves into your Church, though something were more there to be desired, yet you say, there will be nothing contrary put upon them (nor quite another thing.)  
Now that something may be omitted for a time, that may plainly appear; for a man that hath brought his gift to the Altar, and there remembreth that his brother hath aught against him, must leave the offering of his gift, and go and be reconciled to his brother, Matth. 5. 23. 24.  
Now that affirmatives bind not always, is plain; for they bind not always in cases of impossibility, but in such cases God accepteth the will for the deed.  
Further, whereas you say, the excellency of discipline may be forborn for a time, when it is not for Edification of the Church, but for destruction;  
I say, true discipline, (being rightly used) is always for the edification of the Church, and never for destruction.  
And whereas you affirm, that there is nothing contrary put upon us by you, (or quite another thing;)  
I answer, we know you have none of God's Ordinances, without some other thing to accompany them.  
Fourthly, you say, that they may safely be members of your Church in the Reformation of you.  
I answer, You might well have spared this your vain repetition till you had obtained a Reformation.  
But the Reason you have heard alleged for their first going away granted in a letter from Rotterdam. that reason still remains (though you say it is ceased) and will remain till the Reformation, you have formerly promised▪  
But say you, that practise they judge themselves tied to, is founded upon a false principle (namely) that the power of government is given by Christ to the body of the Congregation.  
I answer I have told you before, (in the reply to the second part of this your answer to their third Reason) & I now tell you again, that you make your Priests the head and body both; but Christ hath given the power to the Church which is his body, by whose power every Officer, and member thereof, doth move, and do their several Offices.  
Fifthly, There is, say you a medium, between persecution and a public Toleration; a middle way, say you, between not suffering them to live in the Land, and granting them liberty.  
I Answer, This is a very true thing, for Pharaoh would have been willing, that the children of Israel, should have stayed in Egypt, and made him brick, but he would not suffer them to go into the wilderness, to offer sacrifice. But if Pharaoh had been willing to have succoured the children of Israel, he would have commanded his taskemasters not to lay burdens upon them, that they could not bear; but he did not do so, and therefore their brick-making turned to persecution, even as your injunctions and penal laws do here in England, and you bind them up with a pretence of his majesty's command, which makes the burden very mighty.  
By this it is plain, that no good man can live in England without persecution, even at this day.  
But you would have them to have a third way, for you say persons may live in the Land, and enjoy their Lands and liberties, and not be compelled to profess, and practise, things against their conscience.  
I pray you (Mr. Edward's) bethink yourself now, how untruly you speak and whether you do not look one day to give an account, for your words; for you know that no man can live in this land, and enjoy his lands and liberty, but he shall be forced to worship according to the custom of the Nation. Nay, children that be but sixteen years of age, though ignorant, and scandalous in their lives, are forced to receive the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, though it be to their utter condemnation.  
Further you add, that if upon petition to the Parliament, the Papists should have the Statutes repealed, which enjoin them to come to your Church, yet say you, the granting the Papists a public toleration, for their Religion, would be quite another thing, in as much as you say though the Papists were the first in p●t●tioning for the former, yet they move not for the latter.  
For answer to this▪ I tell you;  
First, That for granting the Papists public exercises will not much cross your principles, for they and you are natural brethren.  
Secondly, for that they move not for the latter (as you say:) They need not for they enjoy it without moving and till this Parliament, none hath disturbed them for many years.  
But further, you add▪ that so you judge that the independent men may live in the land freely, and enjoy their liberties and estates, (but you have your clause whereby you still cross all your own tale; your clause is that it must be) by coming to your Churches, and enjoying the Ordinances.  
Whereas you say so you judge, it presupposeth that the Papists do come to your Churches, by what comes after, that it must be by coming to your Churches, and enjoying the Ordinances.  
Indeed the Papists may come to your Churches, and enjoy your Ordinances, for first they were their Ordinances; for when you apostated from Rome, you carried the Romish traditions with you, even as your forefathers in their apostasy from Christ Jesus, carried some of his Ordinances with them; so you retain something of Gods to make your own ware pass in sale, and have patched you up a bundle of worship borrowing ●lso some Jewish and He●●henish Ceremonies to make up your pa●ke; and will you be so kind to suffer men to live in the land, if they will but submit to this worship and promise them they shall never be compelled, to profess or practise any more? Indeed you are very liberal but it hath been often said already, (and you have said it yourself) that the independent men, cannot of conscience communicate with you before a Reformation: Therefore if this be the medium you have (between leaving the Land and toleration▪) even that they must submit to your worship, you might have bequeathed this legacy to some that would accept of it, and give you thanks for the Lord hath bequeathed liberty to his S●●●ts and Servants, and hath purchased it at a dear price; even that they should be freed from all Egyptian bondage; and hath commanded them to stand fast in that liberty, wherein he hath made them free: and whether they must obey God's commands, or your counsel be judge yourself.  
Six●●y, you say, If the former answers will not satisfy, but that they must needs be in a Church fellowship, as now they are then (you say) you you will show them away, according to their own principles of a visible Church.  
For answer whereof I must tell you, that fallacies, and false conclusions upon men's words, (without bringing their conditions) can satisfy no man concerning the matter in hand; but it may satisfy all men of your evil mind, that you still labour to turn away the truth as it may appear; by the way you here have chalked them out, to walk in; which is  
That because it is their principle (say you) that a few Saints joined together in a Covenant, have power; therefore you imply that there should never need a greater addition to them. 
* Pag. 43. lin. 16▪ 17.   
This you may know crosseth the whole Scripture as the very prophecies of the Church under the New Testament that is to say, that a little one shall become a thousand, and a great one a strong Nation, Esay 60. 22. and that they should grow up as the Calves of the stall, Mal. 4. 2. not only in greatness, but also in number: and 
Rev. 7.  especially when the lamb overcometh, that is even when the Saints overcome, by the blood of the lamb, and the word 
Rev. 12. 11▪  of their testimony, not esteeming their lives to the death.  
Therefore you might have saved your scholarship, when you went about to teach them, to make Churches in houses, and also to come to your Church, to the Word, Prayer, and Sacraments▪ for they have not so learned Christ; to come one part of the day to worship before the Idols, and to stand another part before God, for if they should do so, the Lord saith, (Ezek. 44. 13.) they should not come near him, neither to do the office of the Priest, nor to come near the holy things, but that they should bear their shame, and their abomination.  
Further, you might have saved your labour in teaching them, to make family Church es: for God hath directed them what to do in their Families.  
And it is not the practice of God's people, to shut out from their prayers, and holy duties, them that are of their Family▪ for God gave his Law to Abraham for another end (namely) that he should teach it his Family, and by so doing, train up members in his family, for Christ's Family.  
Further, you might have spared your care taken to show a way for maintenance, for those men among us, that are scholars bred, for if you can find no better maintenance for them, then to come and be Lecturers amongst you (as you would have them) and to live in hope of the gifts of the dead; that is no good provision: for, for want of those shoes▪ men may go long barefooted▪ seeing they cannot (by your own confession) do that of conscience till there be a Reformation. But you might rather have persuaded your Parish Priests to have bequeathed some of their large revenues unto them: for whether they have Parsonage or Vicarage their pole-money comes in so thick to them and their followers, that it would make any sober minded man or woman to wonder how they can consume it: for besides their ordinary tithes or maintenance▪ which is the principal, they have many other petty aves, which they require of every one of the King's subjects, & they are not so reasonable as his majesty, which is contended with pole-money from his subjects, from 16. years old, and upward, but they will have a share out of him that is borne without life (as it will plainly be proved) for if a dead child be borne into the world, they will be paid for reading a dirge over it, before it shall be laid in the earth, and they will be apt to infer, that that their dear brother is departed in the faith, though it be the child of thieves and murderers, and the like.  
Further, they will yet have another patrimony for the birth of that child, for before the mother dare go abroad, she must have their blessing; that the Sun shall not smite her by day, nor the moon by night; for which blessing of theirs, they must have an offering, and the like they require for all the children that be borne into this world, though there live not one of six to be men or women.  
But for as many of them as do live, they enlarge their revenues, for, if they live to come to the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, than they must pay their offerings yearly to the Priest, though the bread and wine be provided at the parishes charge.  
Further, if they live to enter into the state of Matrimon●, than they must be joined together by a Priest, for which work of his he must have a large Offering.  
And these men be not content to take money where there is money (as the King is) but they will have these (which they call dues) of him that liveth of the very alms of the Parish, whereas the King taketh not a penny of any that receive alms.  
Then if we consider their exa●●ion how they oppress the people, by their cruel forcing of them to pay so much as they demand, (though it be contrary to all Law or equity) it will cause us to wonder at the hardness of their hearts for rather than they will abate any thing of what they demand they will force poor people even to pawn their clothes; for I am able to prove that they do demand of poor people before they can have a child (that is but fourteen, or fifteen years of age) buried in one of the out-Church-yards of the great Parishes (which land is the free gift of the dead, for the help of the poor, even as Creplegates new churchyard, or Algat●s, Ros●mary lane, or White chapel; Mile-in green, (or others the like;) before (I say) they can have such a child buried there, it will cost the poorest parent, seven or eight shillings: Nay, I have known when they have disinherited payment, that they have affirmed, that they would not bury them, except they had their money paid before hand: Nay, when any poor man bringeth out of the remote places of the city any corpse to Bedlam (which is the cheapest place that I know) ye when all things else is discharged, even as, Bearers wages, gravediggers wages, and the ground paid for also; yet they must be constrained to have a twelve-penny Priest, to say something over the grave, and he will grudge if he have not more than a snilling (though he say but a few words without the book) when (perhaps) all the people that be'left alive in the Family, be not worth a shilling.  
Furthermore, If any poor man have a necessity to work, upon one of their saints-days, then Mr. Paritor must come, and have a groat, for citing him to the Court, but if he appear not, he must be Presented, and for not paying Fees, he shall be Excommunicated, and he shall never be blessed in again, but (though he be the poorest man in the kingdom) the price of his blessing will be a noble at the least: but if he happen to die an Excommunicant, than his friends must give money to absolve him after he is dead, or else he shall not be buried in the consecrated Earth: but if his friends will go to the Office, and give but a matter of five pound for his Absolution, after he is dead; then he shall be buried in the Consecrated ground; and they will also affirm he died in the Faith of Christ, ye though he were excommunicated for notorious sin, and lived and died▪ obstinately in it.  
It is a plain case therefore, that these men are a greater plague to this Land▪ then the natural Locusts of Egypt, for they ate up the green things, but these eat up both green and dry.  
Nay, further, I conceive they are more prejudicial to the Common wealth, than the frogs that came up upon the Land of Egypt, for they entered into the Oven, and into the Kneading Trough: and we read not that they ascended higher than the King's bed, and the beds of his Servants; but these are exalted above the Chimney tops, to catch a Smoke-penny from every poor man's house.  
Thus you see the mighty revenues of the Priests: If I had but time to tell you of the things which I know (even of the extent of their revenues) what is gained unto the generality of Priests, by granting of Licenses to Midwives, and to schoolmasters, with divers of their own Officers, such as Paritors, summoners, & pursuivants, with a number of that rank, which have strange names that I know not, It would (as I said before) make all men wonder, how it is devoured▪ for they must be freed from all taxations, and have their houses rent free, and many times eat their bread at other men's tables, and yet (for the most part) they die poor men, and far in debt, and leave behind them, both wives and children, destitute of Calling and Maintenance, which is a plain case to me, that the hand of God is upon this Generation, in cursing that which they would have blessed. And therefore I will confess that I was overseen (in the entrance into this Discourse) when I moved you to persuade these men to bequeathe some thing to their brethren, (that are scholars bred;) for I did not consider, that though they received much, yet they had but little to give, because it is not blessed for increase: but I should rather have comforted you, with giving you knowledge, that God hath provided maintenance for his Ministers; as well as for his People, that they need not bow to you for a morsel of bread; for God taught his Apostles to work with their hands, as Paul saith, that his hands ministered to his necessities, and those that were with him; Acts 20. 34. not that Paul might not receive of the people carnal things, for he declareth the contrary in another Scripture, and I hope, all the Lord's people will confess that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and that it is their duty to make them partakers▪ of their carnal things, of whom they receive spiritual things.  
Further, you are careful to have them sober, and peaceable, and not to preach and speak against what is established by Law 
* Pag. 45.   
Indeed (I must tell you) in my judgement, no man can make way for a true Reformation, except he declare what is evil, before he show what is good.  
Further you say, you suppose subscriptions will not be enjoined to forms of Government and Discipline.  
Here you seem to yield that your forms of Government and Discipline be not of God; then if there be no injunction, none will obey, but if injunctions, none will obey for conscience; for what good man can yield to an injunction that is not of God, so then, (you may see) your injunctions have been the way and means to breed and bring forth a world of hypocrites, as one may easily see by the time-servers of your Church.  
But you say, that without a toleration we may enjoy in a secret way our Church fellowship.  
Indeed (M. Edwards) we have learned that lesson already▪ for Christ hath taught us, that we shall fly into the wilderness, 
* Rev. 12. 14  and that the earth shall help us 
* Verse 16.  but sometimes it proves to the danger of our lives, and always to the danger of our liberty; as it may appear by the practice herein London, for though we meet never so privately, and peaceably, yet such Cattle as yourself▪ are always bleeting in the ears of your Parish Officers, and Constables, with your other Officers, even till you move the Lord Major himself to be your drudge, and as your horn, which you push forward for the destruction of our bodies, when he hath laid violent hands on them, for it is evident that it hath been to the loss of some of their lives; and this is the liberty we have in this kingdom and all through the instigation of you Priests.  
But you say, though some of the more sober and conscientious Ministers and people could use it better, yet the Brownists and Anabaptists, and weak brethren would be apt to scandal: and therefore to avoid scandal, you would i●si●●ate that we are bound to neglect the whole form of Church worship.  
I told you before, and I tell you now, that you are afraid to have your own glory eclipsed and by this all men may see, (and by all your former's answers also) that you would have us to enjoy in this kingdom, neither Ordinances, nor conscience.  
The next thing you lay down, is the judgement of an ancient Father; But indeed he is as sound in the faith as yourself, for he would have men to join to Churches that have no power. 
* Pag. 46. li. ●●.   
And this being the sixth answer that you have given to their third reason, you entreat them to lay all your six together, and to consider s●●ly, whether God require, unless they have a toleration to leave the kingdom to run many hazards, and dangers, when as they may enjoy, so much at home, without a Toleration, as you say you have opened to these six answers.  
To ●ch I answer, when they are laid all six together, they make but a piece of an answer to one of their Reasons, and this piece of your answer is stuffed full of falsities, as hath been already proved, and may further appear, by the conclusion of all here, when you say they may have so much at home, for it hath been proved already, that they can have nothing at home, either in respect of liberty, or worship; (but what they must have by stealth;) for when they would enjoy the Ordinances of God, which are jewels, which you would have none to have but yourselves, that so you might seem glorious; If any (I say) will presume to borrow the jewels, and carry them away, you will pursue after them; and you know it was the practice of the Egyptians of old, for they would have suffered the Israelites to have gone away empty, and left their cattle behind them, so that they might have had nothing with them to have offered sacrifice withal; and I pray you were not the soothsayers the cause of this? by withstanding Moses and Aaron, against the children of Israel, even by the false Figures which they cast before the eyes of Pha●aoh, to harden Phar●ahs heart, even as you Priests do at this day.  
And thus I have laid together your six Reasons, and weighed them; but one truth is sufficient to over weigh them all.  
But yet you have also a seventh Answer which is by itself: and it is this, That if they will not be satisfied (say you) without setting up Churches; it is better they should get out of the kingdom.  
Besides, you would have all others that be of this mind, to leave the Land, and go to New-England, that cannot be satisfied, but that they must erect Churches to the disturbing of the peace of three kingdoms.  
Truly (Mr. Edwards) you show yourself a bloody minded man, that would have the Innocent suffer for the faults of them that are guilty. Was not the sending of your mass-books into Scotland the cause of the disturbance? and hath it not appeared plain enough to the Parliament and to the Scots, before the Parliament sat, that the Bishops and Priests were the cause of the disturbance? I doubt not but you have read both the Scotish Intentions, and their Demands, with their Declarations, which have plainly manifested, who and what was the cause of the disturbance, it was not the meeting of a handful of the Lord's people, which ever sought and do seek the good and welfare of the three kingdoms, with the life & happy reign of their sovereign Lord the King, who always sue unto God for the peace of the kingdom, in whose peace they may enjoy peace: but contrariwise, it plainly appears, that it was you and your father's house which caused this variance.  
But say you, it will be no great harm for many of them to go away.  
I answer, It is like you apprehend the Judgements of God coming upon you, and you think to be eased, by driving out the Lord's people in haste.  
Further, you say, you would rather go to the uttermost parts of the earth to live in a mean and hard condition, rather than you would disturb the peace or good of three kingdoms.  
For Answer, to this I must tell you, I would you had considered this before you had done it. But now seeing God of his mercy hath reconciled them again, it may be the wisdom of you and your fellows, to depart unto Rome, that God's true Religion may be set up here in England without Popish Injunctions, that so the last error be not worse than the first; for you say, It is better that one perish than unity; therefore (in my judgement) it is better that they should run the hazard, who have occasioned the strife.  
Further, you plead for yourself and for hundreds of your brethren, that you have borne the brunt of the times, and yet you do profess that you will submit to what is established by Law, because you hope it will be blessed and glorious.  
I tell you, you are even like Isachers ass, and so are the rest of your fellows, even willing to stoop down between two burdens, because ease is good: for the Law indeed makes every thing seem glorious; but for any brunt that you have borne in these last times; I think it hath not overloaded you; for I have not heard that you have been at two pence cost, to maintain the Lord's people in prison; and therefore you are very unlike to Obadiah, for instead of hiding of the Lord's people, you cry out upon the Parliament to have them hunted; and this is a great brunt indeed, (if it be well considered) and it is doubt it will cost you dear, (by that time you have paid your reckoning) except God give you repentance.  
But you further express, that you would not set up true Churches against a true Church.  
I answer, neither would these independent men, I hope, for those things which God teacheth his servants to do, be not against the truth, but for the truth, neither can they be any cause of Divisions, or heartburnings, between either Ministers or People.  
And thus you may see, and behold, that your seventh Answer (to their third Reason) that you have now left alone, is a noun Adjective in respect of proving any thing that you brought it for.   

YOu say their fourth Reason is, that if the Ministers and Churches be not tolerated, they are afraid that in time they shall draw most of the good people out of the Land after them.  
And for answer to this, you say, you suppose they rather hope than fear it; and that, (say you) plainly showeth, they have a good conceit of themselves, and of their own way.  
For answer to you, I say, that this your Answer is but a Supposition, neither do I know whether it be their Reason, for methinks it sounds somewhat like Nonsense, but your Supposition will not prove them to have a good conceit of themselves, neither of any way of their own; for it is the way of the Lord Jesus Christ, that they plead for.  
Secondly, you say, you fear too, but not as they do, but your fear is, least toleration should draw away many good people.  
I pray you trouble not yourself, too much, for if there be no toleration, the good people will fly from you, and stand a far off, and wait for the Reformation which you have all this while promised.  
But now at last you seem to make a doubt of any Reformation at all, when you say, If the Ceremontes and liturgy stand in full force* which presupposeth, that you conceive they will stand 
Pag. 48. lin. 14.  still; but no doubt, but if they be settled by Law, they will seem glorious to you, although they are in themselves Romish Traditions.  
Further, you add, if these stand in force, and Churches tolerated, they will make brave work in a short time.  
I answer, you are so fearful lest the Lord's people should enter into the city of promise, that it is very like you never intend to enter in yourself; and that makes you gather up your hopes, in the midst of all your fears: setting a work your confidence, that God will preserve many judicious, and advised Christians from your way; and therefore you counsel them, to whom you speak, to let them be well shipped, and a Reformation in Government and Ministers; and than you say your fear will be over.  
Truly methinks you patch your matter together very disorderly: for you have many times said, that upon a Reformation they would communicate with you.  
But now you would have them well shipped, which I think is the Reformation 
Pag. 48. lin. 20.  which you desire: as may appear by the confused speech which you make afterwards; for you say; When there is a Reformation amongst you in Government and Ministers, that fear is over with you; and your Reason is, because when that which first bred these men 
* What it is that bred the Separates.  is taken away, which (say you) was the violent pressing of Ceremonies, and the casting out of good Ministers; and many notorious persons being suffered in the Church of England without all censures, shall be removed; many (say you) will not be bred, and others will be satisfied, and some godly painful Ministers of the Church of England would outpreach them, and outlive them.  
To this I answer, you seemed in the beginning of your Answer, to make them proud persons, or conceited of themselves But now methinks, I hear you boast very much of yourself, and others of your Church.  
But I think it may be very true: for you cannot choose but outpreach them, if you preach them out of the kingdom.  
And it is very like you may outlive them also; if you can but banish them into some hard country, or else get them into some stinking prison, as you and the rest of your father's house have done very lately.  
But further you add, that you and your fellows, will compare with them for all excellencies and abilities.  
Me thinks it had been more credit for you to have given your neighbours leave to speak.  
But now you have advanced yourself, you labour to cast them down, for you say, you knew many of them long before they fell to this way, but you have not seen any of them better, nor more profitable, for you say, whilst they were in the Church of England, they preached often, and now seldom.  
I Answer, it is very like they dare not tell such as you when they preach, that cry out to the Parliament to disturb their meetings.  
Further, you say, they go looser in their apparel and hair.  
I answer, I know some indeed that have been constrained to change their apparel for fear of persecution, and (it may be) the hair you were offended at, might be some Perriw●gge, which some of them have been constrained through fear to put on, to blind the eyes of the Bishops bloodhounds, when they have come to take them.  
Further, you exclaim against them, that they take less care for public things that concern the glory of God, and the salvation of men's souls.  
I answer, if their care be so little, you may wonder, what makes them to take this pains, and care, to travel out of a far country, to sue to the Parliament, by humble petition, for freedom of conscience, and liberty for God's public worship, which are things most concerning the glory of God, and the salvation of men's souls.  
Further, you accuse them, that their spirits are grown narrow, like their Churches, and that they grow strange, reserved, and subtle; further, you say, in a word, they mind little else, but the propagation of their independent way.  
For answer whereof I say to you, that it is no marvel though their spirits grow narrow, towards such an adversary as yourself, and great cause they have to be strange towards you, and reserved and subtle also.  
But whereas you say their Churches be narrow:  
I say they are even like the way to ●e●v●n or the gate that leadeth unto life, which is so narrow, that such as you can hardly enter in thereat.  
But if their greatest care be (as you say) to set up the independent way 
* Pag. 49. ● 9 10.  (which is the way of God:) This still crosseth your former slander of them, that they little mind the public good, and salvation of men's souls. But that this is true (namely, that they mind little else but the propagation of their independent way) you bring the Protestation Protested to witness, which Testimony maketh them peaceable men, because they desire to meddle with no man's business but their own.  
And if they mind little else but to set up the independent way, than it will also cross your following speech, (which you say, you speak from your conscience and experience) that never any of them, had so large a spirit for good, after they fell into that way, nor tookesuch care (you say) for the propagation of the gospel, and preaching the Word to men without  
I tell you, indeed if they did not take care to preach the Word to men without, they would never come to preach amongst you, much less would they then sue for liberty so to do, (as the Welsh Ministers have done) if they had not a desire to inform the ignorant, in those truths that God hath revealed to them.  
And therefore you may see in your accusations against them, you are proved a very slanderer, and have taken upon you the office of Satan, the old accuser of the Brethren.  
But you conceive God never honoured them so much afterward.  
But seeing it is but your conception, it matters not; for if they were active for God, and did famously and worthily before they entered into the way of God, I am sure they could not but be more active afterwards; for when a man is in a Journey (especially if he know or conceive himself to be out of the way) he goeth on heavily till he meeteth with some directer, either to inform him that he is in the right way, or to direct him how he shall get into it; and being settled in his right way, he goeth on more cheerfully, and actively than he could do in the time of his doubting; even so it must needs be with these men, as I said before.  
again, you say, that the men that hold those principles of Separation, God did never honour much.  
I answer, it seems you think God's thoughts are as your thoughts, and because you seek for the praise of men and have it, and a few men honour them: and because Christ's flock is a little flock▪ therefore you imagine they are not honoured of God, which is very carnal reasoning.  
●. But as you have slandered the men all this while; so now you here slander their way (and principles) which way is the way of God, and whose principles are God's truths; yet (you say) there is such a malignity cleaves to it, even as doth to the episcopacy. This is a very great slander, to compare Godswayes to the ways of Satan, in saying there is such a malignity cleaving to it, which altars men's spirits, and makes their hearts worse; and yet you here confess, that many of them continue good in the main.  
Thus much for your Fourth Reason.   

YOu say, their fifth Reason is, That this is no other but envy in the Ministers, that makes them against Toleration, because they fear their people will desert from them, and come to us, being so pure in Ordinances, and Churches; and thus you say the Protestation Protested speaks.  
Your answer to this Reason is,  
1. That it is not out of envy, but you hold their practice sinful and unwarrantable to separate from your Churches, and to erect such Congregations, and therefore you say, you speak against it, and that you here promise to make good in a following Discourse.  
For answer to this, I must tell you, that it is not your denying it to be out of envy, that will clear you, for there is nothing appears more plainer, than that envy against the truth, and the Professors thereof, was the cause of your writing against Toleration.  
And that it is through fear your people will desert, is plain, by your own confession in your Fourth Reason; where you say, that if the liturgy, and Ceremonies, stand in force, and Toleration be granted, they will make brave work in a short time▪ and yet you hope some judicious Christians (as you say) will be kept from their way.  
But in that you here say, you hold the practice sinful and unwarrantable  
You have made that part of your judgement known already before; but your judgement was grounded upon no true Principle; and therefore it hath been already proved to be emoneous.  
And whereas you say, you will make it good to be sinful in a following Discourse:  
I answer, If you can but make men believe this, you will work a wonder. But I know it is impossible, for you to make good your promise, and therefore I cannot expect performance.  
Now to clear yourself.  
2. You say, it cannot be counted envy in Ministers, to be unwilling to have their flocks, and people fall from them.  
I answer, By so saying, you rather confirm their Reason than remove it, (namely) that it was your fear of the de●erting of your people.  
But for you to insinuate, that the people that be called out of a way of sin, and brought into the way of grace, and liberty▪ be stol●●● away, and tempted away by strangers (as you would make it) concluding that it is as tolerable for children to forsake their parents, renouncing the 〈◊〉 that bare them, and the ●●pp●s that gave them suck▪ throwing dirt in the face of father and mother, as it is for a man to forsake Idolatrous worship; this is an unjust comparison, and crosseth the whole tenor of the Scripture.  
Now you would make this your own case, for you allude to your spiritual children, who (say you) are the fruit of your labours.  
I pray you, how can you count the Parish of St. Elens' your spiritual children, seeing you are there but an hireling; and as you have not begotten them to the Faith, so you have not taken the charge of them, to watch over them as a spiritual Father, and you will only preach to them so long as any will pay you wages, but no longer; how then have you converted them to God? from what have you converted them? or what have you converted them too? have you turned them from serving dumb Idols, to serve the living God? I have heard of no great change of them, nor of any other where you have preached; you found them in the Church of England, and you found them Christians, (in your own judgement) and you know they were baptised, when you came to them; and in the same Church where you found them, there you leave them; I pray you, how have you begotten them to God? you found them under a false power, submitting to a false worship, and you justify them as men begotten to God, and you justify their standing there. Thus do you sow pillows of flatteries under their elbows.  
But you need not to fear any man's coming to steal your Disciples away by night, as the Jews gave out falsely of Christ's natural body, for that was but a lie; therefore let no man presume to lie by their example.  
But you say therefore you ought to watch against us, (and ought not to sleep) lest they should be stolen 
* Pag. 50. lin 23. 〈◊〉 lin. 29.  away.  
I answer, so did the Jews watch the natural body of Christ and yet he by his power raised himself, and also departed from them; even so by the same power will he raise from the death of sin, many that are amongst you, and will cause them to separate themselves from your false worshipping, and from you that are false worshippers, and he will tell them where he feedeth his sheep, and causeth them to lie down at noon. 
* Cant. 1. 7.   
Neither can you clear yourself by saying, you ●i●ty them, and love them, and would not have such a sword as a tolerátion put into their hands (as you are pleased to say) to hurt them, though some amongst them (say you) might perhaps use it better.  
I pray you fear not this, (which you here call an error on the right hand) but rather fear your Church, if (as you say) your liturgy and Ceremonies stand still in force, which (you say) were the causes that bred the Separates. 
* Pag. 48. l. 23, 24.   
I tell you, if the sa ne cause remain you may justly fear, it will take the same effect; you have also as great cause to fear the profaneness and atheism, which is seated in the hearts of most of your people, but only that you bless yourself, in hope that all ignorant and scandalous persons shall be driven out. But I pray you tell me, whither do you intend to drive them? if you leave them anywhere in the Land, they will be still of your Church: except you will make you a new Church: But if you should drive them out of the Land, you would leave many places of the Land uninhabited; for the generality of the people (in most parts) be ignorant, and profane; and thus you may see yourself in a great straight, and therefore you have great cause to fear.  
Further, you say, the Author would intimate that the honest souls are with them, and would be for their way; but as for those that are against their way and Toleration, they are not such honest souls.  
If this Author be the Protestation Protested, you have wrested his words, for he hath not said they are not such honest souls neither hath he entered into judgement against any.  
But further, (you say) you would have them know that the honest souls are not only with them: for in the Church of England (say you) there ever have been, and are honest Ministers and people, that have rejected our way, and any that fell to it, nay the greatest Non-conformists, and most able in that way (you say) have written the most against our way, and laboured upon all occasions to preserve the people from falling to us.  
For answer whereof, I must tell you, that the Ministers, and people, were never the honester for' rejecting of that way, (which hath been proved to be the way of God) though they were the greatest Non-conformists in the world: for it is not our way properly, but the gift of the Father, which he hath given us, to walk in; and surely, it is no sign of honesty to commend the Saints in their infirmities, or to condemn them in their works of piety; I say, it is no sign of an honest soul to speak evil of such a holy way: I tell you, I take Hugh Latimer to be an honest soul, though he have declared both by word and writing against such as you; and affirmed, that a lay man fearing God, is much more fit to understand the holy Scripture, than a proud and arrogant Priest; yea, than the Bishop himself be he never so great and glistering in all his pontificalls: and such honest souls (though they are not of the clergy, but of those whom you call the laity:) are the fittest men on the earth to make Churches, and to choose their own Ministers (as I said before) though they be tradesmen; and such as these have dependency upon Christ alone, whose way is properly the sincere way of God. And as for any that have writ against this way (or against those who walk uprightly in it▪) it will not make much for their account, for that part of their work shall burn (as well as yours) though they may be saved: and as for these Authors which here you bring, which have been so careful (as you say) to keep the people from falling into that way; I have read some of their books, and found the most of them, prophesy sad things against he Church of England, except she repent.   

THeir sixth Reason (you say) is, that they are good men, and men of great gifts, and therefore they should be tolerated to have such Churches, it is pity they should leave the Land, and we lose their prayers.  
Indeed (Mr. Edwards) this may be some other, man's Reason, on their behalf, but I hardly believe, that they lived so far from good neighbours, that they must thus set forth their own praise.  
But for answer to this Reason, in the first place; you say, the better men they be, and the more able, the worse, to set up separated Churches.  
To this I answer, that I ever conceived by the Scripture, that those that Christ ordained, to plant his Churches were good men, as it was said of Barnabas, that he was a good man 
* Acts ●●● 24.  and the very like was said of Stephen 
* Acts 6. 5. ●. 10.  and therefore methinks you are shrewdly mistaken.  
But further, you say, they will the more endanger the peace of the kingdom, and make the schisms greater.  
I answer, If it be good and able men that endanger the peace of the kingdom, you may do well to persuade the Parliament, to keep still in your Church, all the dumb and drunken Priests: for they are bad enough, and unable to do good, and yet of my knowledge, they are very able to disturb the peace, and to breed strife, and to bring God's judgements upon the Land, which is able to make a greater schism than you are a ware of.  
Secondly, you say, for their prayers, you have the benefit of them, as well when they are absent, as present, and some of them have sa● (say you) they prayed more for England when out, of it than in it.  
Indeed if they did so, they did well, for that was their duty; but I suppose you (for your particular) had little benefit of those prayers, and that, because God hath hardened your heart, even against them, and all good men.  
Thirdly, For these their prayers you have rewarded them with an accusation (namely) that they left the kingdom, when it was in greatest danger, and in most need of help, and provided for themselves to keep in a whole skin.  
I answer, if they did evil in it, that evil is to be passed by; for it is very probable, that they did know that the GREAT CANONS were already made, and that they were mightily charged, and overcharged, as it may appear by their shivering in pieces: but if they had held to have been shot off; they might easily perceive, that they might beat holes in their own skins, as well as in other men's, and they seeing the plague before hand, might be borne with to hide themselves.  
But you say you stood without them here in the gap, and prevailed with God.  
I answer, It may be conceived, that they prevailed with God, who pray▪ d so much for England, when they were out of it, for God will not hear sinners, 
* Ioh. 9 31.  therefore you cannot expect that God should hear you, so long as you justify the abominations of your bespotted Church; and you know Moses prevailed for Egypt, when he was out of the city.* 
Exod. 9 29. 33.   
But you say it is better to want their company, than to buy it at so dear a rate as a toleration▪ and you say you question not, but the King donte will do well enough without them.  
Is it possible, that you should enjoy the benefit of the prayers of those that you so much slight, and set so little by their company, that rather than they shall have liberty, to worship God in a peaceable way (by your will) they should depart the kingdom, when it is proved, by the Word of God, that God's servants are the strength & glory of the kingdom: for even as the Prophets were the Charets and Horsemen of Israel, so are they that fear the Lord▪ a support to the kingdom and commonwealth wherein they live.  
But as for your kingdom of Priests, it shall neither stand without them, nor with them, for though the Prophets sought to heal Babel, yet it could not be healed, for your horns shall be knocked off; and methinks I hear the decree gone forth, that your kingdom is divided, and therefore you have need, to set down your resolution, that it shall not long stand, but the kingdom of England may safely stand with Toleration.  
Fourthly, you say for this Objection▪ of being good men, you will answer it at large in another Tractate, wherein (you say) you shall mind men of many dangers that may arise to them from good and eminent men; and further, you say you will fully show what little strength is in that Reason, and clear also many things in reference to that Objection.  
I answer, when I see this performed, I will take it into consideration, and then you may hear more of my mind; in the mean while, I rest in the Scriptures; which satisfy me, that good men ever bring a blessing.  
The next thing you bring is this question (namely) whether 
Pag 52.  conscientious men, who agree with you in the main in points of Doctrine, and practise, may be tolerated, and spared, in some things wherein they differ from that which is commonly received.  
Indeed you have made divers answers to this already for it was before your own question, in some of your Reasons alleged against them, where you affirm, that you justify much, both bearing and forbearing, and have also set the counsel of ancient Fathers before them, to teach them to hear with others both in points of Doctrine and practice; wherein they may something differ from that which is commonly received.  
But here further, you add a more large answer, That you still say it is your judgement▪ that there should be bearing in many differences of opinions and practice, so as Christians ought not to judge nor censure one another, nor refuse communion and fellowship, by ●ot admitting men into their Churches, and to the Ordinances.  
You have seemed (all this while) to be afraid lest they should admit too many into their Churches, and now you seem to say, it is the fault of the independent Churches to deny▪ communion to many Saints▪ for some differences in judgement, about Church-Government and Orders. Now if this be true (as you say it is) they are so far from stealing away your members▪ that they will not receive them into fellowship, if there be differences in judgement, 
* When Stephen Gardiner harped upon unity, unity: yea Sir (said Latimer) but in verity, not in Popery: better is a Diversiti●▪ ●●●●●● unity in Popery.  for which you here seem to blame them▪ and therefore I think you would have them open the mouths of their Churches wider, even as wide as yours. But the Scripture hath declared, that the gates of the holy city, are of an equal wideness, for they are never shut, Rev. 21. 25. and yet they are so well watched by the Angels of God, even the Ministers of Christ Jesus, that there shall be no unclean thing suffered to enter in thereat, &c. 
* Rev. 21. 27.  Here you may see if any of you attempt to come in (who are so ignorant and scandalous and spotted (as you say they be) they shall not be suffered amongst us; for indeed they are fit for no society, but the society of your father's house: yet (I say) if any of these do creep● in, it is through the neglect of the Portor, which the Lord hath set to watch, or else it must needs be by their cunning transfiguring themselves to be that which they are not.  
But (you say) you would not have men forced to change their minds, and opinions, by casting them violently out of the Ministry and Church, which (you say) was the practice of many in these late times, and hath caused, so many schisms and strifes amongst you. 
Pag. 52.   
Well, here all men may take notice, that it was the cruelty of the clergy, that caused the schisms and strifes, by forcing men to change their minds, and not the practice of the Separation (as you here acknowledge) therefore in this confession you have crossed the tenor of many of your other arguments, as that the Separates have caused strife in the three kingdoms, and that they had made the rents and schisms, which now you acknowledge to be done by them (that force men to change their minds) which are the clergy of England.  
Further, you say, that you approve not of such practices, but desire to be a follower, and lover of the ways of peace and communion, with any who agree in the main, and have something of God and Christ in them.  
I answer, if you approve not of such practices, I hope you will not hereafter be an occasion to move Magistrates to force men to change their minds, and so justify yourself in that you condemn in others, for you confess yourself, that though these independent men's spirits be grown narrow (even closed up from you) yet they continue good in the main; 
* Pag. 49. lin. 31. ●.  and then sure they have something of God, and of Christ in them.  
You say further, that the practice of the ancient Fathers, that pleaded for bearing, are infinitely pleasing to you.  
I answer, if they be infinitely pleasing to you, I hope you will never be unpleased again, with any of the Lord's servants, about keeping of days, which you say was the diffierence between these Fathers 
* Pag. 52. lin. 33. 34.   
Moreover, you seem to infer, that because Siprian (whom you confess, erred in the point of rebaptising) would not condemn them, who were of a contrary opinion: that therefore men may be tolerated in their differences of opinions.  
But here you have brought an erring Father (by your own confession) to persuade us to keep communion with those that are contrary minded; but the Apostle exhorteth us to labour to be of one mind, that we may walk by one rule, but if any be otherwise minded, we ought to wait till God reveile further, and not to force him to be of our mind, till he hath faith in himself, grounded upon the Word of God. But that ground which you have (that men should be tolerated in their differences of opinions) is built upon the sayings of this Father Cyprian.  
But presently you come with your provisal, which hath quite altered the Case, your provisal is (they may be tolerated) so long as they keep communion with the Church, and submit to the Discipline and orders, and be peaceable, and not speak against what is established by common consent nor practise to the scandal and contempt of the Magistrate and Church.  
I answer, this is but even a crossing of your own speech again, for this constraining of men to yield to whatsoever is established by common consent, is but a forcing of men to change their minds; which you said before, was the cause of schisms and strifes, and though you approve not of it in others, yet (it seems) you could freely practise it yourself, as may plainly appear by what you speak hereafter, which is the very same thing which you have often spoke already; that is, If a few men (half a dozen, or half a score) refuse communion with your Church, and vent opinions everywhere, to the disturbing of the kingdom, and drawing disciples after them, though they were Ministers of gold, and had the tongues of men and Angels, they should not be tolerated.  
Now you have struck up the stroke, but it will not serve your turn; for this your vain insinuation (that they disturb the kingdom and draw Disciples after them,) ha●h been many a time disproved already, because it hath been oftentimes repeated by you, to fill up your matter; nay your own words have disproved yourself▪ where you say, they will not receive them into fellowship except they be of their minds. 
* For this see his eighth Reason against Toleration. pag. 32. lin. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27.   
But further (you say) you would have us to read Calvin upon that subject, in his last Epistle to Felerius: The matter you say is this, that if He would not be reduced into order, the Ministers should tell him, that he is not to be accounted as a brother, because he disturbed the common discipline.  
What the Disciscipline was that he disturbed I cannot tell, but you say it was a Discipline that was common, which makes it appear to me, that it was like your book-worship or your Common prayer-book, which is common as far as the Pope hath any pre-eminence or jurisdiction; and that you confess this Common Discipline, was not the Discipline of God, neither a Discipline that you approve of, appears by your own words.  
That you judge it not of God, appears here in your following words; where you grant this to be the authority of men, and that it is not to be sought after it: &c. and you know the things that they decreed was, that he that would not submit to the Synod must be put out of his place; and you say, that you would not have any cast out of the ministry, or Church, because it breedeth schisms 
* Pag. 26.  and by this it appears, that you allow not of this manner of Discipline, and by this one may also plainly see, that you are made all of contradictions, as it may plainly appear in the very next words following, where you conclude, that the authority of men is not to be sought, when the Spirit of God pronounceth of such, &c. and here you quote the 1▪ Cor. 11. 19 where you would make Paul an author of casting men out of their places, because they would not yield to the Synod. I pray you hath Paul in this Chapter discoursed of any such thing? was not the controversy here about long hair, about which Paul saith the Church hath no such custom of contention; and doth not Paul himself put the thing to be judged by the Church? in the thirteenth verse, where he saith, judge in yourselves, Is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? and further, in the 14th▪ verse, Doth not nature itself teach us, that if a man have long hair it is a shame unto him? and was not this Doctrine grounded in the Law and Prophets, and confirmed and established by God long before the Apostles time? yes surely it was, and therefore it will not serve your turn, to prove that Synods may decree customs, for the Church of God; but it will serve your turn to prove what you desire, that is, a dependency between Rome and England, and that the Bishops of Rome and England by their Synods, should make all their shavelings to crouch and submit, and bow to their injunctions; for your own practices prove it, by your very submitting, be it never so contrary to the Law of God, and of Nature itself▪ if it be but confirmed by a Synod; and therefore it appears that it is your malignity of spirit, which causeth you to write as you do.  
But you say you do it from a zeal;  
But I tell you, it is a zeal against God's glory and the good of his Church, and against the preservation of purity of Doctrine, and holiness of life, even at the best like unto the zeal which Paul had, before he knew Christ, when he went with Letters from the high Priest, to pe●secute the Church of God, and when he was their pursuivant, to enter into houses, and to hale men and women to prison 
* Acts 8. 3.  if Paul should have said for himself, as you would now plead for yourself, that peace could not stand with toleration, and therefore it was meet to disturb their meetings, it would not have served his turn, for if God had not stricken him down in the way he should never have seen the Lord Jesus (but to his confusion) though he was a man every way as well informed as yourself.  
Yea, ●e might have pleaded as well as you, that he did it not out of passion, but that he had thoughts of the Church way before; for you may know that Paul was a member of the Church of the Jews, which was erected by God, and was zealous for the Law, and mighty in knowledge being brought up at the feet of Gamaliel, 
* Act. 22. 3●  and also a free borne Roman, 
* Ver. 2●.  and yet he neither knew Christ, 
* Ver. 8.  nor what Christ would have him to do, 
* Ver. 10.  but he thought other ways of himself, or else he would not have persecuted the professors of the truth, but that he imagined there was evil in the practice of the truth; even as you say you apprehend evil in the practice of independency, though they see it not that practise it, because (say you) they are engaged in it, but it was ignorance in Paul, so to think, and so (at the best) it is ignorance in you. Therefore you have no need to say, that you see more evil in it, than the independents can do, but you should rather have said you seem to see, for you cannot see an evil where none is.  
But you wish that the independent Ministers, would consider what hath been written.  
I answer, indeed (for my part) if their considerations be as mine, and though they consider it as I do, without partiality, yet they will find nothing in it, to persuade them to lay aside all thoughts of setting up separated Assemblies (which hath been plainly proved to be the way of God) much less that they should come, and grow into one body, and join in one way with you, so long as you have so foul a body (which you confess you have) and your way so contrary to the way of Christ, being indeed away of your own devising.  
And touching the counsel of Mr Calvin to this purpose.  
I say, If he should counsel, as you counsel, it would be to me but a as blast of breath; for we are to take the council of the holy Ghost, by the mouth of Paul, which bids us follow him, as he follows Christ.* 
1 Cor. 11. 1.   
But you would have us to consider, what Paul requires in a Pastor, of which things you say, this is not the least, that he ought not to be self-willed; that is (say you) to be addicted to his own proper judgement.  
I answer, I have considered this text already, and do conceive, that this rule of Paul is broken by the Pope of Rome, and the Popes of England, which are addicted to their own wills, and set up their own proper judgements for a Law; which evil and error Paul saw in his time, when he said, the mystery of iniquity began then to work.* 
● Thes. 2. 7.   
Moreover, I do acknowledge that it is a virtue in a go●d Pastor from his heart to fear contentions, and not to differ from his brethren, ●nlesse it ●e in cases greatly necessary, but what is all this which you have said to the matter in hand, you know Paul spoke to the Churches planted in the order of Christ's gospel, and not by the order of the man of Sin, and therefore it will not help you to call them again, to consider what they may enjoy in your Church, for I have proved it plainly before in my reply to your Answer to their third Reason, that a Saint of God can enjoy no thing in your Church without sin, and therefore what you think you have showed before in your three first Reasons is nothing at all; for though you say it is but some circumstances that be wanting, about the manner and form of Discipline. I tell you you want the substance, even Christ to be the head of your church, and have made you a head of Archbishops and Lord Bishops, which head is full of leprosy.  
But here you have brought Mr. Calvin to cross you shrewdly, and you would have us to believe him; and indeed with my heart I believe it, whether Mr. Calvin speak it or no; you say he affirms that the Scriptures express the substance of discipline; this is very true; but in another place you say, that Calvin said, there is no express precept concerning this matter: 
●or this see Reasons against independency, pag. 5. lin. 12. ●●.  And the like you rehearse presently in your next words for you say he affirmeth, that the form of exercising it, must be ordained by the Ministers for edification, because it is not prescribed by the Lord.  
Doth not Clavin and you both cross yourselves here? hath Christ indeed written in his Word the substance of Discipline and not the form? you would make (indeed) the substance of discipline without form, and void, even as the earth itself was, when darkness was upon the face of the deep: so you would have men conceive there is a substance, but they must have no rule to know where to find it; for you say, the form of exercising it, is not prescribed. Here you would make Christ wanting to his own house, for we know that Moses had the form of the house, as well as the substance of the house, and the form of every Ordinance, with every, circumstance that was to be used, in and about God's worship, and the form was given unto Moses by God himself and Moses had not power to alter any thing in the form, neither had any of the Ministers which came after him: but the wicked Priests did alter the form, and Apostated from the truth of those Ordinances taught by Moses; even so the wicked Antichristians apostated from the form of wholesome words given by Paul, which was to follow him as he followed Christ.  
And also from the rule of our Saviour Christ given to all his Apostles, that they should teach the people what he commanded them, (Matth▪ 28. 20.) And this (you may see) was not only in substance but in form also, for Paul expresseth to the Corinthims, the very form of breaking of bread, which he had received of the Lord Jesus; 
* 1 Cor. 11. 23.  and by this you may see you have given the holy Ghost the lie, even as Calvin also, affirming, that the form of exercising it, is not prescribed by the Lord; and therefore I would have you▪ (Mr. Edward's) to take the counsel yourself, that you give unto others, for it is very good counsel.  
First, that you please not yourself in your own Opinions.  
Secondly, that you be not so addicted to your own judgement, but remember the danger that Calvin lays down here, that a man being wedded to his own Judgement, so soon as ever an Ocation offers itself, will be a schismatic; and I have told you already, that this was the first occasion of schism and apostasy, from the truth of the gospel's worship, that being dark in their minds, and judging the substance of God's worship to be without form; and as they themselves (so presuming) took upon them to prescribe a form themselves, so they being wedded to their own judgement, did schism from the truth of the Scripture.  
Thus you say you have delivered your own soul.  
But to whom, or from what you have delivered it, I cannot tell.  
But you say further: you hope the brethren, will withdraw their petitions, that they may not be read in the honourable house of Commons, but, if they should be read (you say) you hope the House will cast them out. 
* For this see his Book pag. 55.   
I Answer, That they should withdraw their Petitions, is but one of your vain hopes, for they had more need now to petition then ever they had, both to God and men▪ seeing such a Goliath as you, musters up so many forces against them.  
But the later of these your vain hopes, doth manifest the malice of your heart, in that you hope the house will cast their pe●itions out?  
Are you so void of true piety towards that Honourable House? or judge you that House so void of common Reason? being as they are indeed the very Eyes of the whole land; the ears of the whole land, and the Tongue of the whole land; yea the hand and power of the whole land: being so as I conceive in my simplicity, would you have them, I say to be blind of one eye? and to look upon the Petitions and complaints of some of the people of the land, and not upon all? would you have them so partial? would you have them also deaf of one ●are? that they should not harken to the cries and petitions, and complaints of all the King's subjects, one as well as another? would you have them also so defective in their tongue, that they should not be for the praise of them that do well, as well as for the punishment of evil doers? nay, seeing they are called Gods, 
* Psal. 8●. 1. 6.  would you have their hands so shortened, that they should not once stretch them forth, to support and help the poor afflicted members of Jesus Christ? Then indeed you would have them very unlike unto Moses, even as unlike as yourselves are unto Aaron.  
Would you have this House to exercise their power upon persons before they have made due trial of the cause? (by hearing witnesses speak on both sides: truly (Mr. Edward's) if you would (as it appeareth plain it is your mind,) than I will submit to the judgement of both the Houses of Parliament, whether you be not a man void of common Reason; for he is a fool that judgeth a matter before he know it.  
And you are not only void of Reason yourself, but you would have the Parliament to be like you; for if the Parliament should judge a man before they hear his cause, they would be like the Court at Lambeth, which were used to sit in the high priest's Hall, judging matters without due trial.  
Further, you say you are persuaded, that it will never be said of this Parliament, that they opened a door for Toleration.  
For Answer to this, I must tell you, that I conceive, they may receive a Petition, and yet not open a door for Toleration; I mean for such a Toleration as you here speak of, for setting up Churches against Churches, for that is not the Toleration that we plead for, but your evil conclusion.  
And therefore you may pray, if you will, that that door may be kept shut.  
And we will pray also that all doors may be kept shut, that will let any evils into the kingdom in process of time, lest that any succeeding generations, should have cause to write in their Chronicles of this Parliament, as it was written of Naaman the Syrian; that is (as you say, (it will be said of them) but they granted a Toleration.  
Moreover, we desire nothing at their hands, that may cast a dark shadow upon their glorious light.  
But that which we desire, is liberty of conscience to practise God's true worship in the land wherein we were borne, which will be no blemish to any Christian Magistrate to grant, nor for any counsel of state to establish.  
And therefore you should not have concluded this your Discourse against independency, and against Toleration, before you had offered it to the trial before some lawful Committee chosen by the Parliament, to hear both you and them; and then if you could have maintained your church of England (which you plead for) with your Synods, and counsels, Ceremonies, and book-worship, Canons, and censures, Citations, Degradations, and Excommunications, with your Absolutions, to be founded upon the substance of that Worship and Discipline, which you say Calvin affirmeth, is expressed in the Scriptures▪ then you might with the more show of honesty have admoninished the Parliament, to have cast out their Petitions, but till than you may lay your hand upon your mouth, and never for shame affirm, that the granting of Toleration unto us (to worship God, without molestation) will be setting up Churches against Churches.  
Neither ought you to have concluded against them▪ before you had proved their way of worship to be contrary to the word of God, or not to have footing in his word (as yours hath not) for except you had done this, you have small cause to rejoice in your thoughts, in respect of the accounts that you are to give about this v; for your controversy can be conceived at the best, to be but▪ the controversy that Paul had, when he went unto Damascus which was a controversy against Christ 
* Acts 9 4. 5.  though Christ in his rich grace pardoned him, when he had smitten him down, and driven him out of himself▪ and made him to confess, that he knew not Christ, in these words (where he saith,) LORD WHO ART thou▪ and further acknowledged that he knew not the will of Christ? by asking him (with these words) WHAT WILT thou HAVE ME TO do? thus you may see, though the controversy was against Christ, yet Paul was reconciled to God the Father, by Jesus Christ the son, and endued with the holy Ghost, which made him a Minister of the New Testament, which all his human learning could not do.  
And Paul might have boasted that he was stirred up by the Spirit of God, against the way of Christ, as you boast, that you are stirred up by God's Spirit against the way of Separation. But that would not have justified Paul, much less shall it justify you; for Paul did that he did out of a zeal to maintain the Law of God. But yours is to maintain the Law of sin, even the Law of Satan. Paul persecuted those that he did conceive to be evil; but you persecute those that you acknowledge good men, and such as have been active and famous for God.  
And therefore you have no need to boast of the Spirits enabling you all along, and that above your own strength (as you declare) for it may plainly appear (unto all men of understanding) that it was the very spirit of delusion.  
And therefore, you may justly expect Censures and Reproaches (as you say you do) because your way in this action was not pleasing to God.  
But for my part, instead of censuring you, I would rather reprove you; and admonish you, rather than reproach you, and pray that God might turn you. And if God would be pleased to give you that reward of your labour, which he gave unto Paul, even to strike you down, and to make you to hear his voice, and learn to know him, and what he would have you to do; than it would turn much to the praise of God, and to the comfort of your poor soul, if you be a chosen vessel unto him, (which is the thing you pretend you aim at) and then you shall be sure to gain truth, and love and peace, and holiness in all your after discourses, when you shall speak with a new tongue, and express the language of Canaan.  
And now (Mr. Edward's) for conclusion of the whole, I do here affirm, that if upon the sight of this book, you shall conceive that I have either misconstrued your words, or accused you without ground (necessarily drawn from your own speeches) or that I have mistaken the sense of any Scripture, that I have quoted in this book▪ or that I have not answered you directly to the point (by any oversight) Then choose you six men, (or more, if you please) and I will choose as many, and if you will we will agree upon a Moderator; and try it out in a fair discourse, & peradventure save you a labour from publishing your large Tractates, which you say you intend to put out in Print against the whole way of Separation; and if it can be made appear that (in any of these particulars) I have missed it, I will willingly submit, But if you overcome me, your conquest will not be great, for I am a poor worm, and unmeete to deal with you.  
But if you do give another onset, before you accept of a parse, (seeing I have offered you conditions of peace) the world will judge you an unreasonable man, and you shall never have the day.  
But if you will (say your quarrel is only against those Ministers, that justify your Church and Ministry, and worship) and can prove that the ministers of Holland and New England do generally justify the Church of England, and the ministry of the Church of England, and the worship instituted by the Church of England: I say if they thus far justify you, (as I have here specified) then will I freely acknowledge (when I hear them speak it) that I was mistaken concerning them (yet the case in controversy stands still to be tried between you and me) but I do otherwise conceive of them for the present, because I am credibly informed, that they do, generally and publicly, renounce the power by which they were called to their office of Ministry, in and by the Church of England; some of them affirming that they have stood Ministers too long under such a false power; others confessing here in public, that it was their sin, that they had not revealed so much to the people before they went away, with many the like expressions, which I can prove, if we come face to face, which maketh it appear to me (for the present) that though they preach in the Assemblies met together by public authority, yet they judge themselves to be Ministers sent of God to separate the precious from the vile, and that though they have not an outward mediate calling (seeing they have cast it off, because it was false) yet they have an inward immediate calling, as all the Ministers of God had in former time, which were able to unfold the mysteries of the Scripture, though they had neither calling by man, nor by the will of man but by the holy Ghost.  
And I hope these men, (of whom I speak) will never return to serve God before the Idols, nor preach for wages, as Balaam did, but still stand fast in the liberty wherein Christ hath set them; Seeing they cave haste off the grievous yoke of Antichrist, separating between the precious and the vile, fitting men for the Lord's building, that so they may go up to Jerusalem by troops.  
This is my charity towards them, though I know them not by face, and I think I may boldly say that none of them knows me.   Esay 41. 21. Stand to your cause, saith the Lord, bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob. Esay 5-8. Take counsel together, yet it shall be br●ught to nought, pronounce a Decree, yet it shall not stand, for GOD is with us. 
FINIS.