A CONFUTATION OF M. Lewes Hewes HIS DIALOGUE: OR, AN ANSWER to a DIALOGUE or Conference between a Country Gentleman and a Minister of God's Word, about the Book of COMMON PRAYER. Set forth for the Satisfying of those who clamour against the said Book, and maliciously revile them that are serious in the use thereof. Whereunto is annexed a Satisfactory Discourse concerning EPISCOPACY and the SURPLICE.  
Published by Authority.  
LONDON, Printed for I. M. at the George in Fleestreet, near Saint Dunstan's Church, 1641.   

M. LEWES HEWES His DIALOGUE ANSWERED: Or, An Answer to a Dialogue or Conference between a Country Gentleman and a Minister of God's Word, about the Book of COMMON PRAYER. Set forth for the Satisfying of those who clamour against the said Book, and maliciously revile them that are serious in the use thereof. Whereunto is annexed a Satisfactory Discourse concerning EPISCOPACY and the SURPLICE.  
Published by Authority.  
LONDON, Printed for I. M. at the George in Fleestreet, near Saint Dunstan's Church. 1641.   

AN ANSWER TO A Dialogue or Conference BETWEEN A Country GENTLEMAN AND A MINISTER of GOD'S Word, About the Book of Common PRAYER.  

The DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
I Am very glad that I have met with you, and did long to speak with you, that you might satisfy me in some things, concerning the Book of Common Prayer; therefore I pray you tell me truly (as I hope you will) is there any thing in it contrary to God's Word?  Min. 
Yes verily, it is full of Popish errors, and doth appoint horrible blasphemies, and lying fables to be read to the people, in stead of God's holy Word; and hath caused the Church of England to groan under the abominations of the Church of Rome, even from the infancy of it, in Queen Elizabeth's time, until this hour; and now there is great hope, that a time of refreshing and deliverance is at hand, through the blessing of God, on this Parliament.   

The ANSWER.  
If you were not as great a friend to the Brownists, as you are an enemy to the Papists, you would not thus cast dust in the face of the Church of England, and blemish the piety of those, who notwithstanding they died in defence of the truth against Popery, did nevertheless embrace the Book of Common Prayer, using it to their great comfort, commending it to others, and sometimes hugging it even in the very flames: as in Master Foxes Acts and Monuments may be seen.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
I never heard any blasphemy, or lying fable read in the Church.  Minist. 
I think so, because (it may be) that you were never in the Church on those days, wherein they are appointed to be read.  Gent. 
Upon what days are they appointed to be read?  Minist. 
On the fourth of October, in the forenoon, it appointeth an horrible blasphemy to be read for the first Lesson, out of the 12. of Toby and the 9 verse; where it is written, that Alms do save from Death, and purge away all sin: which is a main ground of Popery, and an horrible blasphemy against Christ and his blood, that cleanseth us from all sin, 1 joh. 1.7.  
Also in the 15. verse of that Chapter, it is written, that there are seven Angels, that do present our prayers: which is another horrible blasphemy against Christ, who only doth present our prayers, Rev. 8.3,4.  Gent. 
These are horrible blasphemies indeed.   

ANSWER.  
I hope (if you be a Minister, as you say you are) you cannot but know that those Books which are not in the number of the Canonical Books of Scripture, are not appointed to be read as the other are. For our Church (though it be otherwise in the Church of Rome) doth not apply them to establish any doctrine; as in her sixth Article of Religion she hath proclaimed. They are not allowed to thwart any place of holy Scripture; but at the best to inform manners, and not to confirm faith: For though they be in many things clear and correspondent to the holy Scriptures yet this makes them not to be of the same Canonical authority. All that S. Hierom saith is this, viz. that they be Canonici ad informandos mores, non ad confirmandam fidem. And S. Austin thus, 
Aug. De Civit. Dei, lib. c. 23.  Let us (saith he) omit the Scriptures that are called Apocryphas, because the old Fathers, of whom we had the Scriptures, knew not the authors of those works, wherein though there be some tr●ths, yet their multitude of falsehoods makes them of no Canonical Authority, where by saying, Let us omit the Scriptures that are called Apocryphas, he means that they should not be used for the proving of any Doctrine, which cannot be proved out of the other Scriptures, which are the undoubted Word of God.  
Nor be they but of use likewise for matter of Story, especilly the Books of the Maccabees; which nevertheless, are not to teach a man either to sacrifice for the dead, or to kill himself.  
The direction therefore which King james gave the Clergy, in his Conference with them at Hampton Court, is altogether a full answer; namely, that wherein there was any error, he would not have them read at all; which saying of his must needs be enough to stop this quarrellers mouth, and tell him, that he makes a stir without a cause, not caring to disturb the peace of his holy mother; which how he can be able to answer, let him judge by that which Christ hath charged him with, in Cantic. 2.7.  
And thus, both by the Articles of our Church, the determination of Fathers, and the direction of his late Majesty of blessed memory, all moderate and quiet spirits may be satisfied concerning these books Apocrypha, both for their gonerall and particular.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
I pray you let me hear some of the Fables that are in it.  Min. 
On the fourth of October in the afternoon, it appointeth a lying fable to be read out of the 11 of Toby, where it is written, that Toby going to the door to meet his son Tobias coming from Rages, did stumble; and that his son ran unto him and laid the gall of a fish to his eyes, and that the whiteness did scale off, and he restored to his sight.   

ANSWER.  
To think that this is therefore fabulous, because the gall of a fish is said to be used as a medicine for the eyes, is more than a wise man will be forward to affirm. 
Vid, Llod's Treasury of health.  Physicians writ, that dim sighted eyes are cured by the gall of a Partridge: so also, by the gall of a Turtledove. I have likewise read that the gall of a Cock mixed with the juice of Selandine and honey, being anointed on the eyes, restoreth sight. The gall of a Gripe or Ram is also used in medicine for the same purpose. And if the galls of these creatures be thus precious for the eyes, why may not the like virtue be in the gall of some fish? I have read it of the Tench, that his slime is for some things as medicinable as a salve; whereupon the Tench is commonly called the Physician of other fishes. And although I want leisure to search further, yet on the sudden this I find, That the fat of fresh river fishes, molten and mingled with oil and honey, are of great excellency for the clearness of the eyes: and if the fat of some fishes, why not of some their gall?  
I conclude therefore, that more happy is he, who by his pains and industry, can find out the causes of things, than he who is so singular as to account all fables but his own fancies.   

DIALOGUE.  Minist. 
On the thirtieth of September, another lying fable is appointed to be read, of an Angel that was sent to scale the whiteness from his eyes, and to give Sara the daughter of Raguel to his son Tobias in marriage, and to bind Asmodeus an evil spirit, that was in love with her, and had killed seven men that had been married unto her.   

ANSWER.  
You care little for method, I see; September else had been before October. But to let that pass, and come to the matter in hand: Though I think no man bound to believe any further of this, which you term another lying fable, than himself pleaseth; yet this is certain, that the Scriptures themselves declare how the Angels are sent on God's errands, and have sometimes appeared not only to punish the wicked, but also to do good offices for the godly: as when Lot was led out of Sodom, two Angels came unto him and left him not, until they had set him in safety. Nor was the Pool of Bethesda but moved by an Angel; after which motion he that first stepped in was healed, of whatsoever infirmity he had.  
The Scriptures also mention, that the Angels are all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation, Hebr. 1.14. and that the good Angels sometimes fight against the bad, Revel. 12.7. and that they pitch their tents round about those that fear God, Psalm. 34.7. The Scriptures (saith Saint Austin) 
Aug de civet. Dei, ●…b 15. c. 23  plainly aver that the Angels have appeared, both in visible and palpable figures. Which saying of his, is verified, even by that already mentioned concerning the Angels which came to Lot at Sodom: for Lot saw them in the likeness of men, talked with them, and had trial of the palpableness of their bodies, even when they put forth their hands and pulled him into the house, if not also when they led him out of the City. An Angel of the Lord appeared likewise unto Gideon, in the likeness of a man, with a staff in his hand, Judges 6.21. And how Manoah and his wife were instructed by an Angel, concerning the birth and education of their son Samson, is recorded in the thirteenth chap. of the same book of Scripture.  
By all which it appeareth, that there is no absolute necessity, that this which you mention should be therefore fabulous, because an Angel was sent among them: For the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is Nuntius in Latin, as you know, and that (in English) is a Messenger. It comes from the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is Mitto, To send: and therefore the word Angel is no name of Nature, but of Ministry or Office; as is observed by the Fathers.  
And as for that which is next, of the evil spirit being in love with the daughter of Raguel, I find in the writings of some Authors that which I am sure is nothing against it. And first of all I shall mention that which is certain; namely, that some, both places and persons, have been haunted by evil spirits: and therefore it is not altogether improbable to think some such thing of Saras bed and Chamber. The more unlikely is, that the evil spirit should have liberty to kill her seven Husbands: and yet we know that the Devil hath had leave sometimes to do the like; as in that 
* See also Psal. 78.49.  example of jobs servants and his children (recorded in the first Chapter of the book of job) is plainly manifest.  
But the most unlike is, that this evil spirit should be in love: a thing which comes something near to that interpretation which Lactantius gives, 
Lact. lib. 2. cap. 15.  of the Sons of God and the daughters of Men, in Genesis the sixth, the second; namely, that they should take them Wives, have carnal action with them, and by that means be kept out of Heaven and cast to the Earth; who thereupon became agents and officers for the devil and his angels, who were fallen long before. Now against this, Saint Austin comes with a firm belief: for though he seems to yield, rather than deny some such thing concerning Devils, as I shall afterwards mention; yet he firmly believes the contrary concerning Gods Angels. And as for devils, Michael Psellus affirmeth (out of one Mark a great Daemonist) that the watery and earthly Devils have such bodies as are nourished like sponges with attraction of humour, affirming also that they have certain genitors, cast forth sperm, and produce (by which I think he means the Fairies) divers little creatures. The Egyptians say that the devils can only accompany carnally with Women, and not with Men. Plutarch goeth further, and saith, That the Fables of the Gods signified some things that the Devils had done in the old time. And there are (saith Ludovicus Vives) 
Com. in Aug. De civet. Dei lib. 15. c. 23.  a people at this day which glory that their descents are from the Devils, who accompanied with Women in men's shapes, and with Men in women's.  
Whereto agreeth that which is reported of Merlin, that he was begotten of a spirit. Nor is it but a general report, and averred by many, either from their own trial, or from others that are of indubitable honesty and credit, as saith Saint Austin; that the Sylvanes and Fauns, commonly called Incubi, have often injured Women, desiring and acting carnally with them: And, that certain Devils (whom the Frenchmen call Dusies) do continually practise this uncleanness, and tempt others to it, is affirmed by such persons, and with such confidence that it were impudence (as saith the same Father) to deny it. See August. De Civitate Dei, lib. 15. cap. 23.  
Much more concerning this may be read in Burtons' Melancholy; which relations, whether they be true or false, is not much material: or suppose them false, yet can they make nothing against us, it due regard be had to that allowance which Our Church gives to these Books Apocrypha.   

DIALOGUE.  Minist. 
On the first of October another lying fable is appointed to be read, how Toby being about to send his Son Tobias to Rages in Media for a Wife, did bid him go and look for a man to go with him, and that he went and found an Angel, and brought him to his Father, who promised to give the Angel wages, and agreed with him what he should have by the day, and sent him with his son and his dog.   

ANSWER.  
Had old Toby known him to be an Angel, it is like enough he would have demeaned himself otherwise: but taking him to be a man as he seemed, he was more honest than to set him a work for nothing. Nor in case this story were as true as could be, were it more absurd for old Toby to offer this Angel wages whilst he knew him not, than it was for Gideon to present an Angel with a Kid; or for Lot to afford the Angel's lodging; or for Manoah to dress a Kid likewise, that the Angel might eat: For Manoah, saith the Scripture, knew not that he was an Angel, judges 13.16. And as for the dog going with them, it is an usual thing for a dog to run abroad with his Master: and (I pray) quarrel not with him, for fear he bites you. Little reason is there that you should be troubled to see a man with a dog at his heels, except he were going into a Church: But if you be of the Pack of Praecisians, you care as little to exclude your dog from thence, as you do to shut out your own irreverence. And yet jacob could say, 
Gen. 28.17.  How dreadful is this place! surely, it is no other than the house of God, and the gate of Heaven. The Lord also saith, 
Levit. 19.30.  Ye shall observe my Sabbaths and reverence my Sanctuary. And in the Prophet Malachi; 
Mal. 1.6.  If I (saith the Lord) be a Father, where is my honour? If I be a Master, where is my Fear? And in the Gospel, 
Mat. 21.13. & Luke 19.46.  It is written (saith Christ) that my House shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of Thiefs: Thus 'twas then. And I would to God it could not (in some sort) be as truly said, that God's House is by many made no better still than a den of Thiefs: wherein they rob him of his service, and are not against the respect which is done there to themselves, giving none at all to him before whom they cannot be too reverend, but should bow (which we commonly read Worship,) fall down, and kneel; 
Psal. 95.6.  as the Psalmist speaketh.  
Nor doth Saint Paul but say 
1 Cor. 11 22.  That the Corinthians despised the Church of God: for which he praised them not. And as for reverence to be done to the Lord of Heaven and Earth, the same Apostle instructs the Hebrews thus: Wherefore (saith he) 
Heb. 12.28,29  We having received a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us have grace whereby we may serve God acceptably, with reverence and a godly fear; For our GOD is a consuming fire. All which Scriptures, mentioning these things, are quoted in the Margin.   

DIALOGUE.  Minist. 
On the third of October another lying fable is appointed to be read, how Tobias being come from Rages did call the Angel unto him, and bade him take a servant and two Camels, and go to Rages for money, and that the Angel went and carried writings which he delivered to Gabael, who brought bags of money sealed up, which he delivered to the Angel.   

ANSWER.  
Her's still great noise, and little Wool: much spoken but to little purpose; as in the former answers hath been already showed.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
O horrible, how have the Bishops deluded King Edward the sixth, Queen Elizabeth, King James, and Our gracious King Charles, and the whole estate, and made them believe, that there was nothing in the service Book contrary to God's Word. God Almighty deliver us from them.   

ANSWER.  
You talk you know not what: for, that the Bishops have not deluded the state, nor those Princes which you speak of, appears; First, by the Martyrdom of those worthy Bishops which suffered in the days of Queen Mary, Secondly, by the conference holden at Hampton Court in the beginning of King james his Reign, who (as you know) was a Prince so well accomplished in learning, and particularly in Divinity, that (if they would) they could not have captivated his judgement and skill; as in that conference is most apparent: His wise Nobles saw it well enough; For being present and observing all passages, they were persuaded that His Majesty spoke by inspiration. And thirdly, that they went not about to delude him, appears by that which they said throughout the whole conference; and especially by the fair dealing with His Majesty about particular absolution, and private Baptism.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Now that you have showed me the blasphemies and lying fables; show also what are the Popish errors that are in it, and first tell me, whether the Service Book doth command, that all both Ministers and people shall bow their bodies, when the Name Jesus is read?  Minist. 
The Bishops only, without any warrant from God, but from the Pope.  Gent. 
I have read that the Name Jesus was a common name among the Jews, was it so?  Minist. 
Yes, Syrach of Jerusalem had a son whose name was jesus, Eccl. 50.23. Also joshua the son of Nun was called jesus, Acts 7.57. and one of Saint Paul's fellow Labourers was called jesus, Col. 4 11.  Gent. 
Why do the Bishops make an Idol of the name Jesus, by causing men to bow their bodies, and to put off their hat when it is read?  Min. 
Because they mistake the Word of God, where it is written, that at the name of jesus every knee shall bow, both of things in Heaven, of things on earth, and of things under the earth, Phil. 2.10.  Gent. 
What is the name of Jesus?  Min. 
As by the name of our gracious King Charles is meant, not the name Charles, (which is a common name) but the authority and power that God hath given him over all people within his own dominions; as when men are pressed to the King's service, they are pressed in the King's name, that is, by virtue of authority and power from the King: even so, as by the name of K. Charles is meant his authority and power, etc. So, by the name of jesus jam meant the authority and power, that God hath given him over all things in Heaven and in Earth, and under the Earth.  Gent. 
What is meant by things in Heaven?  Min. 
By things in Heaven are meant the holy Angels and souls of the faithful, that have no knees.  Gent. 
What is meant by things on Earth?  Min. 
By things on Earth, are meant all mankind living on earth, whether they be Elect or Reprobate.  G●nt. 
What is meant by things under the Earth?  Min. 
By things under the Earth, are meant the Devils and damned souls in hell.  Gent. 
What is meant by bowing of the knee?  Min. 
By bowing of the knee is meant subjection, Isa. 45.23. and not bowing of the body when the name Jesus is read, as Pope Anastatius did command, Anno 404.  Gent. 
What is meant by bowing of every knee, of things in Heaven, of things on earth, and of things under the earth?  Min. 
Thereby is meant, that all the holy Angels and Saints in Heaven, and all mankind on earth, and all the Devils and damned souls in hell shall submit themselves to Christ, and acknowledge him to be Lord of all, and to have power over all, to save and condemn whom he will.   

ANSWER.  
You undertake at the first to speak of things in the common-prayer-book: but now I see you are fallen upon something else. His name (as you say) which first commanded to bow at the name of jesus, was Anastatius, a man I hope of an earlier date than either to be termed Pope, by way of derision, or to be slighted for his care about this custom, which the Church was acquainted with a long time before he was ever Bishop of Rome. Saint Hierom (in his Comment upon Esay the 45.23. which is the very text alleged by you, to be a testimony against bowing of the knee) speaks of it as no new thing in his time: for It is (saith he) the custom of the Church to bow the knee to CHRIST; which the Jews, showing the perverseness of their minds, altogether refuse to do.; noting thereby, that it was so fare from being new, as that it was come to be one of the Church's customs. Zanchy is able to say, that the use is ancient. Nor do men of great reading but affirm, that it was used in the time of Arius; which must needs be in the Primitive times, because Arius was before the first Council of Nice. Nor might it but be used sooner, if we cast an eye to the scoffings of the Jews: For the Jews began to scoff and mock at our Saviour, in allusion to his name, even when he suffered; and have ever since derided the Christians with their crucified jesus. Thus the chief Priests mocking him, with the Scribes and Elders, alluding to his name Jesus, said; He saved others, himself he cannot save, Matth. 27.42. And (as Marlorat speaketh) 
Marl. in Mat. ch. 1. ● 21.  The Jews in scorn and derision to this day call our Saviour, not Jesus, but Jehu, which with them signifieth only some common and contemptible fellow.  
As then the name jesus is that name in which he was derided, and which they abuse by their chopping and changing that they might thereby abase our Saviour, and with which they flout us for our faith; so is it that name in which he must be honoured: The Father hath assigned so much unto him, and we are bound to afford it as a part of his reward for the death of the Cross. His person (we know) is taken from us; but his Name he hath left still with us: And as his Person for suffering is crowned with honour and glory, Heb. 2.9. So must his Name be so fare exalted, as that at the Name of jesus every knee must bow, Phil. 2.10.  
And thus will your figurative exposition be nothing worth, though illustrated by a comparison of things done in the King's name: For at the name of Jesus is meant Jesus named, to whom we how when we hear him called by that name. For though his Person be exalted and sitteth at the right hand of God; yet his Name, in which he was despised, is not exalted by us as it ought, except we also reverence his Person upon the mentioning of that name, which God hath given him to be above every Name, that at the Name of Jesus every knee should bow.  
Where is then the Idol which you speak of? it would trouble you (sure) to find it out: and therefore that calumny was either ignorantly cast upon the Bishops, or maliciously to bring upon them the greater Odium, obloquy, contempt, and scorn.  
But others you say were called Jesus, as well as our Lord and Saviour: true, some others have had that name given them by humane imposition, but not as given to our Redeemer by God, with a command of his adoration: there's none of them that could either do that which he did, or be saved but by him; and must therefore so resign this name to him, as that he bear it with a main difference from them all.  
And as for that which you say of the holy Angels and souls of the faithful which have no knees, they have their ways surely to do that which we do in our bodies; else it would never be given in charge, that all the Angels of GOD must worship him, Hebr. 1.6. Nor be written that the Saints in Heaven fall down before him, Rev. 5.8,9.  
Nor may them in Hell be excluded: For though it be a torment to them to testify either reverence or subjection; yet, seeing Christ must Reign till he have put all his enemies under his feet, they shall (whether they will or no) be brought unto it: a proof of which assertion is in the foureteenth chapter of the Romans, at the tenth and eleventh verses. In which regard the Apostles words, 
Phil. 2.10.  mentioning that at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow, both of things in Heaven, of things on Earth, and of things under the Earth, are not unfitly said to be a Prophecy, which by many Christians is fulfilling in this life here on earth, by blessed spirits and Saints is fulfilled in Heaven, and shall fully be accomplished in the day of judgement as Master Calvin very well observeth. For though it be a prophecy, we must know that under this prophecy expressed, there is a duty employed; For Prophecies (saith one) are of two sorts, some that are fulfilled in an instant, others by degrees and by little and by little; of which latter sort is this prophecy, that every knee shall bow.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What do you think of them that kneel when they receive the Communion bread?  Min. 
The Papists say, that they are Idolaters, because they kneel, and do not believe the real present, as they do.   

ANSWER.  
It is no matter what the Papists say; Their dislike should (me thinks) moderate your spleen, and make you think the better of us for their sakes. To believe their real presence, is no part of our Creed; and yet to kneel is a part of our devotion. We kneel no more to the Bread than to the Pulpit, or to our seats when we join with the Minister in praying unto God: But our quarrel is not now with them of Rome, but with you for taking dirt out of their puddles, and causelessly to throw it at us.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Who was the first that brought in kneeling?  Min. 
Pope Honorius, about the year of our Lord 1220. after that the error of Transubstantiation was hatched at the Council of Lateran.  Gent. 
I have read in God's Word, that the Apostles did not kneel when Christ Himself delivered the bread unto them. I have read also in the Book of Martyrs, that the ancient Counsels in the Primitive Church did make Canons against kneeling, lest it should prove an occasion of Idolatry. Ought not we to conform ourselves to our Saviour Christ and his Apostles, and to the Christians of the Primitive Church, rather than to the Devils Vicar-general, the Pope?  Min. 
Yes verily, for it is gross hypocrisy in us to make a show, as though we were more godly and zealous than the Apostles and Christians of the Primitive Church.   

ANSWER.  
The error of Transubstantiation we detest as much as you; but may not therefore fall in with you in your irreverence. If the King offer us his hand to kiss, we take it upon our knees: How much more when the King of Heaven gives us his son in these pledges, on whom we feed in our hearts by Faith with Thanksgiving. Another reason is, because it is received in Prayer: and if men will be ruled by reason, they will not, when they are to petition the King of Kings, omit such a gesture of humility, as kneeling is, being the most suitable for a man at his prayers, and for this cause we kneel at the Communions receiving; whereat we both lift up thankful hearts unto God, for the death and Resurrection of Jesus Christ: as also beg of God, that by the merits thereof, our bodies and souls may be preserved to everlasting life.  
It would trouble you (sure) to derive our kneeling from the error of Transubstantiation: and therefore to no purpose do you come in with the name of Pope Honorius, and tell us of what was hatched at the Council of Lateran. If you were acquainted with Tertullias accipere & reservare, you would be ashamed to say that Pope Honorius was the first that brought in kneeling. Adoration of the Host was indeed brought in by him, but not kneeling without such adoration in the act of receiving: for they kneeled at the Sacrament in Tertullia's time; and he lived betimes, and was flourishing about the year of our Lord 200. which was 1020. years before the Council of Lateran. But you think it a great matter I perceive, to set up a Shaw-foule to scare a fool: yet men of understanding will find you out.  
To ollow on therefore that of Tertul. In the Primitive times were times of persecution, when the christians could not meet so often as they would for fear of troubles: they had also their Station days, on which it was not lawful to worship kneeling. In the first case they did accipere & reservare, receive this Sacrament from the hands of the Priest at Church in several portions, and take it home and eat it there, at such times as they thought it fit for their ghostly comfort, that they might be sure to have it for their last Viaticum at the approach of sudden and unexpected danger: but did not always so; for that were to overthrow the nature of the holy Supper and make the Communion to become a private eating. And secondly, on the days of station, when they might not kneel, they rather chose to forbear the receiving and partaking of the holy Sacrament, than to take it standing. Tertullian therefore wisheth them to come, though they might not kneel, and take it standing at the Altar, from whence they might be suffered to carry it home and eat it at their own houses kneeling. The Leper which came to Christ, as Saint Mark reports, he kneeled; and as St. Luke, he fell on his face: teaching us in prayer to fall down and kneel before the Lord our Maker. He that worships God irreverently, shows himself not a Christian, but a Manichee; who thought God made the soul, but not the body.  
It is recorded of the Heathen, that before they began their Sacrifices, the Priest first beheld the people round about him, and demanded, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Who is here, who is here? 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, say the people again: meaning, A company of good folks. Intimating hereby, that if there were any there guilty to themselves of any foul offence, they should departed as unworthy the sight of those rites or mysteries of their religion, which were then to be performed. And yet because they used to sit at their Sacrifices, Tertullian blamed them: 
Ter. lib. de Or●t. cap 12.  For (esteeming them to be Gods whom they worshipped) they ought to show more reverence than to sit before them whom they thought to be Gods: and thereupon inferreth, Quanto magis sub conspectu Dei vivi, Angelo adhuc orationis astante, factum istud irreligiosissimum est. Meaning, that if it were irreligious for them to sit before their false Gods, seeing they esteemed them for true ones; it would be more irreligious for us to do the like before the true God indeed.  
But you say that the Apostles did not kneel, when Christ Himself delivered the Bread unto them? I answer that if this be a good argument, than we should receive in no place but in an upper Chamber, have no more company but twelve, no women but men, and take it at no time but after Supper; all which we know is otherwise throughout the whole Christian world it being in the Church's power to alter matters of circumstance, although she may not alter any matter of the essence, or substance of either this or the other Sacrament.  
The rule which we find in Scripture is, 
1 Cor. 14 40.  that all things be done decently and in order: And without question, what is reputed enough decently and orderly done at some time and place, and upon some occasion; is not so at another time and place, where no like occasion is: we do not therefore make ourselves wiser than Christ and his Apostles, but follow the rule which his word affordeth. So then, if they sat when they received, most like it was because they sat down to supper, and were not yet risen from the Table: nor did they know what their Master was about to do: it was more than ever he did before; They might perhaps be therefore less orderly than otherwise they would have been. And yet that they took it irreverently, is not where manifest, neither that their sitting was like your fashion of sitting, but after another manner, as differing from your sitting, as kneeling is from standing. Or however, this is certain that things were not brought into order, but by degrees; Saint Paul had else never said it, that other things he would put in order when he came. 
1 Cor. 11.34.  I tie you then still to Scripture: For though the King's Daughter be All glorious within; Yet her clothing is of wrought Gold: 
Psal. 45.13,14  so saith the Psalmist, in the 45. Psalm, at the 13. verse.  
And whereas you terrify us with the noise of Canons; when you know how to allege them to better purpose, we shall be willing to hear you: For to urge Canons that were, against Canons that are, is nothing for you. It shows indeed your factious zeal in the way of Shismaticks, and the desire that you have to separate from us, although we care as little for the Pope as you. But because you talk of ancient Canons, I will afford you one to your little comfort; namely, That with Heretics or Shismatickes we ought not to pray: which Canon you may read in the Code of Canons, For the Universal Church, authorized by the Emperor justinian. And that you may the sooner find it, I direct you to the hundred and seven and thirtieth Canon of the same Book; or to the three and thirtieth Canon of the Council of Laodicea, which was celebrated in the year of our LORD GOD 364. as justellus writeth.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What other error do you find to be in the Service-Booke?  Min. 
The interrupting of the Minister by the Clerk and the whole Congregation is a foul error and such an error and confusion as doth much offend God; and that therefore many are unwilling to come into the Church, till the Service be all read.   

ANSWER.  
I doubt me you are none of those who will be so diligent as to read the whole Service: your pretended errors and dislikes which you here lay down in this Dialogue, are cause enough to make me think so. And therefore they of your Parish had need to come betimes to Church, if they mean to know your Text, or hear any more than a piece of your Sermon; except you do as no few of your Sect, trifle away a great deal of time in vain repetitions and idle tautologies in some prayer of your own, which our Saviour Himself likens to the practice of the Heathen, and calls no better than much babbling.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
How do they interrupt the Minister?  Minist. 
By rehearsing his words with a loud voice, and by taking words out of his mouth, and by mingling their prayers with his.   

ANSWER.  
This may be answered out of Doctor Boys, whose words be these.  
I am occasioned (saith he) in this place justly to defend the people's answering the Minister aloud in the Church: The beginning of which interlocutory passages, is ascribed by Platina to Damasus Bishop of Rome, by Theodoret to Diodorus Bishop of Antioch, by Walfridus Strabo to Saint Ambrose Bishop of Milan: all which lived 1100 years before the Church was acquainted with any French fashions: and yet Basil Epist. 63. allegeth that the Churches of Egypt, Lybia, Thebes, Palestina, Phoenicians, Syrians, Mesopotamians, used it long before Socrates and Strabo writ, that Ignatius a Scholar unto Christ's own Scholars, is thought to be the first Author hereof. If any man shall expect greater antiquity and authority, we can fetch this order even from the Choir of Heaven: I saw the Lord (said Esay) 
Esay 6.3.  set on an high Throne, the Seraphims stood upon it, and one cried to another, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God of Hosts, all the World is full of His glory, Esay 6.3. Blessed spirits in praising God answer one another: interchangeably, though unhappy scornful spirits unmannerly term this custom, Tossing of Service, an interrupting of the Minister, a foul error, yea such an error and confusion as doth much offend God▪   

DIALOGUE.  Minist. 
The Minister when he prayeth, is the mouth of the people, speaking to God for them: therefore they ought to be silent, till he hath done speaking, and then to say Amen, 1 Cor. 14.16. and not to interrupt him by rehearsing every word after him, as in the confession of sin, when the Minister saith Almighty and most merciful Father, we have erred and strayed out of thy ways like lost sheep: and in the Litany, when he saith, o God the Father of Heaven, have mercy upon us miserable sinners; The Minister must stop and be silent, till the Clerk and people have with a loud voice rehearsed every word after him; in which time, it is impossible for the Minister to keep idle and by-thoughts from coming into his mind.;   

ANSWER.  
If it be so with you, that idle and by-thoughts will not be kept from coming into your mind, pray to God to settle you better, and be not so rash as to measure other men's corn by your own Bushel. Saint Ambrose tells us, that in his times the Church resounded again with the responds of Men, Women, and Children, like to the Sea with its beating waves; or like to the rushing of many waters. Thus in the Latin Church. And in the Greek Church, Saint Basil is witness that the voice of their prayers and Responds, was like the noise of waters beating against the Rocks: The pattern whereof seems to be in Revel. 14.2. besides what was before, out of Esay 6.3.  
This is therefore all that I may yield you; viz. that in every part of the service it is not requisite that it should be so: For in many of the Prayers the people are to be silent, and have no more to do with an open and loud voice than to say, Amen. But then again, when occasion is offered, I must say unto them as David did: O praise our God ye people; and make the voice of his praise to be heard, Psalm 66.7. Or, as it is in another Psalm, 
Psal. 95.1.  O come let us sing unto the Lord: let us make a joyful noise to the Rock of our salvation. Or, as in another, 
Psal. 107.31.32.  o that men would praise the Lord for his goodness; and for his wonderful works to the children of men: Let them exalt him also in the Congregation of the people, and praise him in the assembly of the Elders. And in a word, as for those times, in which (by the Apostles warrant) they are to say Amen at the end of the Ministers prayer, it was not without due care observed in the ancient times: Saint Paul mentions it, in the place alleged by you; 
1 Cor. 14.16.  And as Saint Hierome writes, it was the praise of the Primitive Church, That their Amen, was like a clap of thunder; and their Halleluja as the roaring of the Sea.   

DIALOGUE.  Minist. 
Also, when he prayeth for the King, saying, Lord save the King, they interrupt him, by mingling their prayer with his, saying, And mercifully hear us when we call upon thee. The Minister being interrupted and put out, in praying for the King, doth pray for Ministers, saying, Endue thy Ministers with righteousness; they do then also interrupt him, by mingling their prayers with his, saying, And make thy people joyful.   

ANSWER.  
This is strange that you dare dally thus; These Suffrages, at which you kick with scorn, are answerable to that prayer of David, in the hundred and two and thirtieth Psalm, where he prays for the Prince, Priests and People orderly. For the Prince: Lord remember David. For the Priests: Let thy Priests be clothed with righteousness. For the People: Let thy Saints sing with joyfulness. So we in like manner: Lord save thy King. Endue thy Ministers with righteousness: And make thy chosen people joyful.  
This also justifies our order in praying for the King first; for the Clergy next, and for the Laity last of all in our well composed Litany, with which you quarrel next: But had your quarrel been with the matter of it, as with the manner, I should have said as worthy Hooker did, What one petition is there found in the whole Litany whereof we shall ever be able at any time to say, That no man living needeth the grace or benefit therein craved at God's hands? And a little before; It now remaineth (saith he) a work, the absolute perfection whereof upbraideth with error, or somewhat worse, them whom in all parts it doth not satisfy. And let me say, that heretofore Rogations or Litanies were the very strength, stay, and comfort of God's Church. In the days of Mamercus bishop of Vienna, the people seeing how heaven threatened their City with imminent ruin, began to fly away from it: but their Bishop staying still and some others with him, exhorted such as remained to use those virtuous and holy means wherewith others in the like case have prevailed with God: Whereupon they fly to the Rogations or Litanies formerly used, the Bishop perfects them in what he th●ught meet, and adds unto them what the present necessity required. Their good success was not only a thing known, but an encouragement to others, who being afflicted with famine, and besieged by their enemies, took the same course; as in particular is storied of Sidoneus the Bishop of Arverna. Nor do we but find by daily experience that those calamities may be nearest at hand, and readiest to break in suddenly upon us, which we in regard of times or circumstances, may imagine to be farthest off; as judicious Hooker speaketh: Or if they do not indeed approach, yet such miseries as being present all men are apt to bewail with tears, the wise (saith he) should rather by their prayers prevent. Or if finally, we for ourselves had a privilege of immunity, doth not true Christian charity require that whatsoever any part of the world, yea any one of all our brethren doth either suffer or fear, the same we account as our own burden. The Litany (saith one) is a common treasure house of all good devotion. It may be said of the Church in composing that exquisite prayer, as it was of Origen, writing upon the Canticles: In caeteris alios omnes vicit, in hoc seipsum: In other parts of our Liturgy she surpasseth all others, but in this herself. Some mislike the Litany, for that it hath a petition for all men, and all people: and yet the precept in God's word is, that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men. 1 Timothy 2.1.  
Others are angry that we should pray, From sudden death, good Lord deliver us. And I wonder much at this: let men of understanding tell me, and let a wise man hearken unto me, whether it be not better to leave this world with a kind of treatable dissolution, then to be snatched away as in a moment? Xenophon and Plato were Ethnics, and strangers from the common wealth of Israel; yet it was no little beauty to their stories to tell us how leisurely Cyrus in the one, and Socrates in the other departed hence. Absalon had a sudden death, and how did David therefore exceed in lamentation? Elibu speaks of some which die in a moment: we may therefore beg of God to departed as Jacob, Moses, Joshua, David, who had, not only respite to end their own lives in peace; but also to add comforts and blessings to those about them. But I hasten, and come again to the Dialogue.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
Throughout the whole Litany they do interrupt him by mingling their prayers with his.   

ANSWER.  
Here still you urge us with interruptions: but I have already shown the weakness of this cavil in my former answers; and should be glad to see you study quietness, and not to think yourself wiser than the Church of God in all ages, with whom these eager devotions were better esteemed. And as Fishes were never accepted for Sacrifices: so neither would those Christians be as mute as Fishes in their Congregations.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
They do also, without any warrant from God, but from Pope Hormisda, interrupt the Minister when he readeth the Psalms, by taking every other verse out of his mouth, to read it for him with a loud, hackering, and confused noise, especially in Country Churches, where the people cannot read well.  
The Minister when he readeth or preacheth God's word, is the mouth of God speaking to the people; therefore they ought to be silent, and to hearken with reverence?   

ANSWER.  
The Psalter (as you know) contains the whole book of Psalms: they were made by several men; someby Moses, some by Solomon, some by Asaph, and the most by David: and not seldom composed upon special occasions; for the most part either to pray unto God, or to praise him in such a set form of words. David inscribes many of them to sundry Musicians, had them used in the service of God, were then, and have been since otherwise used in the Lord's service then the other Scriptures: their tittles show it, and the practice of the Church, both among the Jews and the Christians, evidently declare it. This therefore takes away the edge of your argument, by which you endeavour to limit them altogether to the mouth of the Minister.  
And whereas you would bear the world in hand, that Hormisda was the man that first appointed them to be used interchangeably, 
See St. Aug. confess. lib. 10. cap. 33.  you are greatly out from the truth of the story, as even your own T. C. will witness against you.  
Pantaleon brings testimony that this which you mention was done by Celestine, 
Pantal. in Chronol.  who was Bishop of Rome about an hundred years before Hormisda. But Polydore Virgil goes higher, and saith; 
Polyd. Virg. de invent. rerum, lib 6 cap. 2.  That the division of David's Psalter into seven parts called Nocturnes, according to the seven days of the week, was the work of Hierom at the request of Damasus, who was then the Bishop of Rome. Damasus also (saith the same author) instituted that the Psalms should be sung and said by course. Thus also Platina: 
Plat. in vitae Damasi.  but some again say, as Polydore noteth, that this was first devised by Ignatius. Thus also Socrates, who maketh Ignatius the Bishop of Antioch in Syria, 
Hist. Eccl. cap. 8.  the first beginner thereof even under the Apostles themselves: he suffered Martyrdom in the days of the Emperor Trajan, unto whom it was related by his own vicegerent concerning the Christians of Pontus and Bithinya, that the only crime he knew of them, was, they used to meet together at a certain day, and to praise Christ with Hymns as a God [secum invicem] one to another amongst themselves. 
secund.  Nor doth this but agree most aptly to the Apostles exhortation, in Eph. 5.19. Speak to yourselves (saith he) In Psalms and Hymns and spiritual Songs. See also Exod. 15.1. compared with verse 21. and again look into Esay 6.3.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
When they read the eighteenth, nineteenth, and twentieth verses of the fifty Psalms, they are likened by some to women scolding and accusing one another. The Clerk and people do begin to scold with, and to accuse the Minister, saying, When thou sawest a thief, thou consentest unto him, and hast been partaker with adulterers; Then the Priest accuseth the Clerk, saying, Thou hast let thy tongue speak wickedness, and with thy tongue thou hast set forth deceit; Then the Clerk and people do set upon the Minster again, and do accuse him, saying, Thou sittest and speakest against thy brother, yea, thou hast slandered thine own Mother's Son.   

ANSWER.  
If you were not a man of a corrupt mind, you would never (I fear me) vent such stuff as this: do you not tremble, are you not afraid to dally thus with the word of God? They are likened by some (you say) to women scolding and accusing one another. And with whom (I pray) should the Minister scold, or who is it that he should accuse, if at any time he should chance to read thus to the people alone? I hope you would shrink out and be none of his auditors for fear he should scold with you, accuse you for consenting with a thief, note you for a partaker with adulterers, a speaker against thy brother, or tell thee that thou hast slandered thine own Mother's son: away therefore with such impious cavils, and dally not thus with the word of God. These scoffs are fit for Pagans then for Christians; especially if they consider how dangerous a thing it is to sport themselves with holy things. Be not angry Man, for I do but reprove thee and set before thee the things that thou hast done: I retort, with as much patience as I can, no more than what yourself hath cast abroad: Others make points, and you take in hand to tag them. But (alas) we have more much like this a little after, which (as I meet it) shall be answered.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
I remember that in the Churching of women, the Minister is called Priest, tell me, I pray you, is that a fit name for a Minister and Preacher of the Gospel?  Min. 
No verily; For we read in God's word, of no more orders of Priests, but of two, the order of Aaron, and the order of Melchisedech.  
Of the order of Aaron, were the levitical Priests, whose office was to offer sacrifices, which together with the Sacrifices was abolished in Christ his death.  
Of the order of Melchisedech was Christ only, and shall remain Priest for ever.  
A third order of Priests is to be found no where; but in the Masse-book, and in our Service-book.  
The name Priest, belongeth to every Christian man and woman, as well as to the Minister, according as it is written, Revel. 1.6. That Christ hath made us Kings and Priests unto God: The meaning is that Christ hath made all the Elect, (men and women) Priests, to offer the sacrifices of praise, and of thanks unto God.   

ANSWER.  
The Minister is called Priest, and why not? I hope you know (for you have noted it) that all true Christians are called Priests: and so Saint Peter, as well as Saint John declareth it, 1 Pet. 2.5. Revel. 5.10. and therefore the Minister in particular may much more be called by that name, although he offer none of those Sacrifices which were abolished by Christ, nor intent the upholding of the Popish Mass, with the blasphemous figments which are there: else we condemn the Primitive Church of God, in which this name, which you here would quarrel with, was of frequent use; as you cannot but know, if you know any thing of the ancient times.  
The Prophet Esay doth 
* Chapt. 61.6.  in one place say the same of Christians in general, which even Saint Peter and Saint John have written: and in 
* Chapt. 66.21.  another place declareth, that God will choose some from among them to be Priests and Levites; which, though it be but an allusion, doth denote a Priesthood still, and this to confist of an imparity as well as of old among the Jews. Besides, were it so that the Minister might not be called Priest no more than any other Christian, because the Scripture saith of every Christian, man and woman, Ye are an holy Priesthood, are made Kings and Priests unto God: Then would it sollow, first that none in particular should be a King; And secondly, that neither might any among the Jews have been a public Priest, or called by that name, because the same which was said to Christians was also said to them, when (out of the Mount) God sent them his message by his servant Moses: Ye have seen (saith the Lord) what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you unto myself. Now therefore if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my Covenant, than ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine. And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of Priests, and an holy Nation, Exod. 19.4,5,6. It is also warranted by that of Saint Paul, in Hebr. 7.12. where (if you mark it) you shall find that Priesthood is not taken away, but translated or changed only: and so also Irenaeus saith, lib. 4. c. 34. And as for the testimonies out of the other Fathers, they are so common, as I need not mention them: only let me say, that you may find the name both of Priest and Priesthood in the writings of Ignatius that Martyr already mentioned, who (as you know) was scholar to Saint John that wrote the Revelation.  
This strife of words you should therefore carefully avoid: it doth but disquiet unstable souls. Grant then that name (without quarrelling) to him, which the Scripture not only gives to every true member of the Church, but foretold it in some sort of even the Evangelicall Ministers in more particular: where, though the Prophet mentions Levites also, who were properly so called in regard of their tribe; yet, as is probable enough, he means not that therefore the name of Priest should not be used no more than that of Levite: for except those Priests to which he alludeth, had had their name only in respect of such Sacrifices as then were offered, and to be ended at the death of Christ, and not in regard also of other duties which are common to us and them, which neither are nor may be abolished, I see no reason to think otherwise. To teach and bless the people were the services of the Priests, both before the Law, and under the Law; as well as now. Melchisedech was a Priest before the Law, and blessed Abraham: to whom also Abraham paid his Tithes, Gen. 14.19,20. Nor was it but said to Aaron and his sons, under the Law; That they should teach the sons of Israel all the Statutes which the Lord hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses, Levit. 10.11. and in Malachy it stands recorded, The priests lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the Law at his mouth: for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hosts; Malach. 2.7. and in Ezekiel, They shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, ch. 44.23. and in 6 Num. the 6 last verses; The Lord spoke unto Moses saying, speak unto Aaron and to his sons, saying, On this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them: The Lord bless thee, and keep thee, The Lord make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto the: The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace. And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them: All which is still done by the Ministers of the Gospel: they bless, they teach, they instruct, they rebuke, they reprove, they exhort, they consecrate the Bread and Wine to holy uses, they offer up the Prayers of the people: nay more, they do as it were offer Christ in a Mystery, and sacrifice him objectively, by way of commemoration. In which we differ fare from the Church of Rome: for the Romish Church professeth the Body and Blood of Christ to be the proper subject; we nay, but the proper object of our Celebration.  
We take then a Priest and Presbyter now to be all one, and list not to quarrel any longer about the word. For should we descend to Grammar, we are told as much as comes fully home; namely, that the word Priest hath his right place in him whose mere function and charge is the service of God.  
Whereunto let me only add that which I find in Bishop Jewel, We know (saith he) that the Priest or Minister of the Church of God is divided from the rest of his brethren, as was the tribe of Levi from the children of Israel, and hath a special office over the people. Neither may any man force himself into that office, without lawful calling. But as touching the inward Priesthood, and the exercise of the soul, we say even as Saint Peter and Saint John, and Tertullian have said; in this sense every faithful Christian man is a Priest, and offereth to God Spiritual Sacrifices: In this only sense, I say; and none otherwise. Thus he: granting that there is a Priesthood internal, and a Priesthood external; For (saith he) there is not one of us that ever taught otherwise. See this in his Defence of the Apology for the Church of England, Part 2. pag. 130.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What do you think of the Priest and Clark, when they do Church a woman?  Min. 
I will not tell you what I think, but I will tell you what some do say.  Gent. 
What do they say?  Min. 
They say that the Priest is like a witch.  Gent. 
Why do they say that the Priest is like to a witch?  Min. 
Because he doth as a witch doth, when she saith the Lord's Prayer.  Gent. 
What doth a witch when she saith the Lord's Prayer?  Min. 
She leaves out these words, but deliver us from evil, and so doth the Priest when he doth Church a woman.  Gent. 
Why will not a witch say these words?  Min. 
Because the Devil will not let her, till she hath bewitched so many as he would have her: For by the evil that is prayed against in that petition, is meant the Devil, and the sin whereunto he tempteth: therefore the Devil will not have her to say these words, because when she saith them, she prayeth that God will deliver her from him and the witchery whereunto he tempteth her.   

ANSWER.  
This is a cavil scarce worth the answering: for it is most certain, that the evil which you speak of, is prayed against. The most therefore which you could urge fairly is no more but this; viz. That the order in saying that Prayer had been better without an answer interposed, then by the interposing of one; in which (I think) you should have met with few or none to quarrel you. But to speak so basely, and in such unbeseeming manner as you have done, serves as a signe to show with what a malignant spirit you wrote these things, who do rather play the witch yourself, by speaking perverse words to draw away disciples after you, then justly accuse the Priest in these your vain janglings. But it is as Saint Paul gave notice a great while since, when he called the Elders of Ephesus together; as we read in the twentieth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, at the 30 verse.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
The Priest doth also skip over the conclusion of the Lords Prayer, for thine is the kingdom, power and glory: and therein also they say that he is like to a witch when she doth say the Creed: for when she saith the second Article, And in Jesus Christ his only son, she skips over these words, Our Lord, and so doth the Priest slip over the conclusion of the Lords Prayer.  Gent. 
Saint Luke leaves it out, and therefore the Priest may leave them out, Luk. 11.4.  Min. 
It followeth not, that therefore the Minister may leave them out; for Saint Luke did not write any thing of himself, but what the holy Ghost would have him to write.  Gent. 
Why would not the holy Ghost have him to write them?  Min. 
Because it was sufficient that Saint Matthew had writ them, Math. 6.13.   

ANSWER.  
Here you show us still more of your skill in witchery, and tell us of the Priests skipping over the conclusion of the Lords Prayer. And indeed if there were not some Precedent for it in Scripture, it might not be; But there is precedent for it (in Luke 11.4.) although you be pleased to pass it over with a non sequitur: And yet for all that, it may follow well enough. For whereas it seemed good to the holy Ghost, in one Evangelist, to add the Doxology; and in another to omit it; the Church is blameless, and may indifferently follow either the one or the other, seeing both of them wrote by inspiration: For who knows (except you, who know any thing) whether it were the purpose of the holy Ghost to have Saint Luke omit it, because Saint Matthew had recorded it; and not rather to show that it was a complete Prayer at the end of the petitions, although the reason of the petitions be not mentioned where the Doxology is omitted? It is well then to repeat those words of the conclusion; and not ill, although they be not always mentioned: for our Church in so doing hath the pattern not only of all the Latin, and some of the Greek Fathers, but even of Saint Luke himself. Quando dicimus, libera nos à malo; nihil remanet quod ultra adhuc debeat postulari, as saith Saint Cyprian; 
Cypr. de Orat. Dominic.  that is: When we say, Deliver from evil; there remains nothing more to be prayed for.;   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Some do think, because Saint Mark, and Saint John do make no mention of the Lords Prayer, that therefore the Minister may omit the reading of it; and that because the Evangelists and the Apostles did not use to say it as a Prayer, therefore none (neither Minister nor people) ought to use it as a Prayer.  Min. 
The truth is, that our Saviour Christ did make it for all Christians to use as a prayer, and also for a pattern to pray by?  Gent. 
Where do you find that our Saviour Christ would have it used as a Prayer?  Min. 
In the 11 chapter of the Gospel written by Saint Luke, and the second verse, where it is written, that our Saviour said; When you pray, say, Our Father which, etc.  Gent. 
Where do you find that our Saviour would have it used for a pattern?  Min. 
In the sixth chapter of the Gospel written by Saint Matthew, and the nineth verse; where it is written, that our Saviour said, After this manner pray you, Our Father which, etc.   

ANSWER.  
I would that all in your book could have been as well approved as this: for here you speak both the words of soberness and truth; and I commend you for it.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why will not the witch acknowledge Christ to be the Lord?  Min. 
Because the Devil would have her to take Him, and not Christ for her Lord.   

ANSWER.  
This is mentioned to great purpose, I promise you; is it not? I am loath to trifle away the time in these passages, I should else go near hand to tell you, that as Simon Magus was taken for some great one, because he had a long time bewitched the people with sorceries: so you, perhaps, would be thought some great one too, for your profound knowledge in what passeth between the Devil and witches, of which you have so often told us. But whilst you are so busy in the Theory of their trade, and apply your speculations no better, you do but show yourself in your colours to please a company of frantic and mispersuaded people, wilful and wand'ring souls, who are led with an intemperate spirit as well as you. The simple (saith Solomon) 
Prov. 14.15,16  believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going. A wise man feareth and departeth from evil: but the fool rageth and is confident. 
Ch. 16. v. 29, 30  A violent man enticeth his neighbour, and leadeth him into the way that is not good. He shutteth his eyes to devise froward things: moving his lips, he bringeth evil to pass. 
Ch. 15.2.  The tongue of the wise useth knowledge aright: but the mouth of fools babbleth out foolishness; And I pray (good Sir) do you a little work upon that.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why do some say that the Priest and Clarke when they do Church a woman, are like to a couple of players acting their parts?  Min. 
Because the Priest doth skip over these words, But deliver us from evil, and doth leave them to the Clerk to say for his part, etc.   

ANSWER.  
Before he was like to a Witch; but now he and his Clerk are likened to Players: you will one day be ashamed of this, I fear; unless you act a better part before you leave the stage; your present Plaudite may deceive you: the future is that which is most material. But let's go on, and see what followeth.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
And (then) as soon as the Clerk hath said them, the Priest saith Lord save this woman thy Servant, than the Clerk comes in again with his part, saying, which putteth her trust in thee; then the Priest, as though he would not have the woman to put her trust in him, turns her over to the Clerk, and bids him be unto her a strong Tower: then the Clerk answereth and showeth wherein, saying, from the face of her enemy.;   

ANSWER.  
Oh desperate wickedness! dares any man be so bold as to utter such impieties? The first words [Lord save this woman thy servant] will stand as a sentence against this profane babbler to witness against him, be he whom he will. He a Minister! more fit to make a railing Rabshakeh, or a scoffing Michal. Let him therefore in time look well unto it, lest with profane Esau he lose his birthright, and be deprived of his heavenly Father's blessing. As well may he tell us that we are to have no other God but the Minister, because the Minister reads the first Commandment, as vent this thus concerning the Priest and Clark in their Churching of women.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
This is a very strange kind of giving of God thanks for women's safe deliverance from the great pain and peril of Childbirth.  Min. 
It is indeed, and no small grief to honest women, not only because there is no thanks given to God for their safe deliverance from the pain and peril of Childbirth, but also because thanksgiving is turned to a Jewish kind of Purification: For they must come with a veil to cover their faces after the Jewish manner, signifying thereby, that by child-bearing they were made unclean, and that they were ashamed of their uncleanness, or that they had played the Harlots, and were ashamed to show their faces; and Juda thought that Thamar was an Harlot because her face was covered with a veil, Gen. 33.14.15.  
It is a great offence, not only to honest women, but also to every true Christian man, to see his wife go to the Church like a Jew, or like an Harlot.   

ANSWER.  
You have a fine faculty in moulding of matters, I see; and in fashioning of things according as yourself thinks good to fancy: One while you say it is a strange giving of thanks; another while, it is no giving of thanks; and then again, it is a giving of thanks, but turned to a Jewish kind of Purification. You would make a pretty Proteus, I perceive: But I will reprove thee, and set before thee the things that thou hast done: Thou hast let thy mouth speak wickedness, and with thy tongue thou hast set forth deceit; according to that of the Psalmist, with which you dallied but even now. Can I tell how to say otherwise? Is here no giving of thanks? I marvel that you blush not, nor be ashamed to wrest things contrary to the evidence of open sight. I have lifted up mine eyes unto the hills from whence cometh my help: words (sure) of thankfulness. Nay the whole Psalm is an Hymn of Praise and thanksgiving, fitly chosen for such a purpose. 
2 Chr. 29,30.  Moreover, Hezekiah the King, and the Princes commanded the Levites to sing praise unto the Lord, with the words of David, and of Asaph the Seer: and they sang praises with gladness, and they bowed their ●eads and worshipped, 2 Chro 29.30. The Church than you see goes on in a right way, and repairs to a worthy store-house for a fitting form. But I perceive your drift, as if you aimed (like T. C. your great Goliath) to have no public thanks in such a case as this, because it comes too near the Jewish kind of Purification. Wherefore I shall answer in more particular, and tell you, that although that Law as concerning the Ceremony be ceased; yet the righteousness thereof is to be fulfilled in those which walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit, Rom. 8.4. For in all things we are commanded to give thanks, 1 Thess. 5.18. And must offer the Sacrifice of praise unto God, Heb. 13.15. And if for other benefits thanks and praise be due, then for this preservation, which (in Melancthons' phrase) is Magnum miraculum, a great miracle: insomuch that if the Child, when he comes to know it, will not stick to say with David, Psal. 139.13. I will give thanks to thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: then may the Mother not refuse who is wonderfully preserved and delivered. So then; this is no Jewish Ceremony, but a Christian duty, performed, not out of Custom, but out of Conscience; not to make the act of honourable Marriage unclean, but to bless God for deliverance from so manifold perils. Whereupon neither can the veil be the badge of an Harlot; but as new gloves are fit for Marriages, and blacks for Funerals: so this, an attire for such a time, not only decent and grave, but also most useful and convenient to distinguish her from other women: And herein the Apostles rule is well observed, viz. that All things be done decently and in order. Where's then the Jew or the Harlot that you spoke off; or the great offence, not only to honest women, but also to every true Christian man? you fight with shadows, I do assure you; and produce the abortive fancies of your own brain, which are too weak to endure the touch.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Many do say, that the manner of administering the holy Sacrament of Baptism prescribed in the Service-book is very absurd and full of Popish errors, and so ridiculous as they cannot but laugh at it; I pray you tell me, what do you find in it to be so absurd and ridiculous, as they cannot but laugh at it?  Min. 
The Interrogatories ministered to Infants that have no understanding; and the answer of the Godfathers and Godmothers are so absurd and ridiculous, as they cannot but laugh at them: as first, the Minister must examine the Infant, and ask him, If he doth forsake the Devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, the covetous desires of the same, the carnal desires of the flesh, so that he will not follow nor be led by them: he must also ask him, if he doth believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith, and if he will be baptised in that Faith.  Gent. 
Were not these Interrogations administered to Infants in the Primitive Church?  Min. 
No, these or the like were then administered to such as were of years, when they were converted and came to be baptised, and afterwards commanded by the Pope to be administered to Infants.  Gent. 
What answer doth the Godfathers and Godmothers give?  Min. 
They give no answer, but do counterfeit the Infant's voice (as if he were a conjured Ghost) speaking within them, and answering to the first Interrogation, concerning the Devil and all his works the vain pomp and glory of the world, the covetous desires of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, that he doth forsake them all; and to the second and third, concerning the Articles of the Christian Faith, that he doth believe them all; and that he doth desire to be baptised in that Faith.   

ANSWER.  
Oh how daintily you toy and dally still with the Church's Customs! Do you not hug yourself for this rare invention of the conjured ghost? It must needs be admirable, to be a man of such a deep conceit, and to have such a Spirit within him, as can make him express himself thus pithily. Your dull Doctors may hold the blinking candle to you, and come hither (with shame enough) to learn as curious fancies every way, (or very near,) as admirable as what was delivered by you formerly, of the Devil and Witch, of the Players and the Scolds, in which your masterpiece of piety was most apparent, and proved to be as impious an expression as any you need to utter.  
But to beat about the bush no longer: Your quarrel is now about Interrogatories ministered to Infants, and the Answers of the Godfathers and Godmothers; a custom (you say) first brought into the Church by the Pope. But by what Pope, I wonder? The name Pope, you know, is ancient; but in ordinary acceptation sounds harsh, and is odious; and had never been mentioned thus covertly by you, had it not been for the better colouring of your bad cause, which indeed you had need varnish over as well as you can.  
If he were a Pope that first appointed this order, I must tell you he was a very ancient one: one that lived before you, or your great Grandfather were borne. They that call him by his name, use to say that it was 
* Otherwise written Higinius.  Higynus Bishop of Rome, about the year aster Christ's birth 150. At which time (you know, and a great while after) Rome was famous for her glorious Martyrs, the very Bishops (whom you scornfully term Popes) laying down their lives for the faith of Christ. You cannot tell how to deny it; your face must be more than brazen if you should attempt it: nor can you exclude him from among the men of the Primitive times, who was flourishing no later.  
Infants, as well as elder ones, were baptised from the first: for to this appertaineth that which is clearly set down in the Scriptures, that the Apostles baptised whole houses or families. Origen saith, 
Orig. in Epist. ad Rom●…. viz. in ca 6.  That the Church of Christ received of the Apostles themselves, baptising of Infants. And Augustine (against the Donatists) 
lib 4. c. 23, 24.  boldly affirmeth, That baptising of Children was not fetched from the authority of men, or of Counsels, but from the tradition or doctrine of the Apostles. Neither do I think it a matter easy for any man to prove, that ever Baptism did use to be administered without some kind of interrogatories, or profession of Faith: whereunto Saint Peter (as the learned think) alluding, hath said, 
1 Pet. 3.21.  that the Baptism which saveth us is not (as legal Purifications were) a cleansing of the flesh from outward impurity, but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, an interrogative trial of a good conscience towards God. Higynus then might dispose of something in this order, in such sort as it hath continued since, but not be he that first appointed it: whereto is pertinent that which I find alleged by another, namely, That the profession of Faith, as it appeareth by records, 
Mr. Bedf. treat. of the Sacr. pa. 200.  was at the first direct and plain, by recitation of the Creed, and forms of Confession: Afterward it seemeth, that for help of memory, and to provide a remedy against bashfulness, that which the party repeated was put into questions propounded by the Minister, answered briefly (as now the form is) by the party; And what the Men grown answered by themselves, the same did Parents for their Children before the time of Higynus. It is the saying of worthy Hooker, 
Eccl. Polit. lib. 5. sect. 64.  That which a Guardian doth in the name of his Guard or Pupil standeth by natural equity forcible for his benefit, though it be done without his knowledge. And shall we (saith he) judge it a thing unreasonable or in any respect unfit, that Infants by words which others utter should, though unwittingly, yet truly and forcibly bind themselves to that whereby their estate is so assuredly bettered? Herewith Nestorius the Heretic was charged as having fallen from his first profession and broken the promise which he made to God in the arms of others. Of such as profaned themselves being Christians, with irreligious delight in the ensigns of Idolatry, Heathenish spectacles, shows, and Stage-plays, Tertullian (to strike them the more deep) claimeth the promise which they made in Baptism. Why were they dumb being thus challenged? Wherefore stood they not up to answer in their own defence, that such professions and promises made in their names were frivolous, that all which others undertook for them was but mockery and profanation? That which no Heretic, no wicked liver, no impious despiser of God, no miscreant or malefactor, which had himself been baptised, was ever so desperate as to disgorge in contempt of so fruitfully received customs, is now their voice that restore (as they say) the ancient purity of Religion. Thus that worthy Hooker. We ask them (saith Saint Austin) 
Aug. Epist. ad Bonif. 43.  which offer the Infants, and say: Believeth be in God? (who being of that age, knoweth not whether there be a God or no: They answer, He believeth: and so they answer unto every question which is asked. They became sick and were burdened, another sinning: so also being to be made sound they are saved, another confessing for them; as even the same Father observeth. 
Serm 10. de ver. Apost.  And it is amplified by a late judicious writer, thus: Profession is either actual, or virtual: An actual profession of Repentance, and faith is required of them, who by the acts of reason formerly abused, have multiplied their personal transgressions; but for Infants a virtual profession is sufficient, and such a profession we find in them, in respect of their Propagation: They are not unfitly termed Believers, because they are borne within the Profession of Christianity: As also the Infants of Pagans are justly accounted Infidels, because they are born in the Profession of Infidelity: And if Saint Paul had disputed this case, I doubt not, but as he said of Levi, that in Abraham he paid tithes to Melchisedech; so he would have said, that the seed of the faithful do in their Parents profess the Faith of Christ.; And then, as it followeth: Add this (saith he) That this virtual profession is actuated by the promise of the Sureties, and Parents at Baptism. And a little after, It is plain that that Ab-renunciation, is the profession of repentance, in the name of the Child: so also the Recitation of the Articles, a profession of Faith, and reputed his, according to that well known saying of Saint Austin, peccavit in alio, credit in alio, as his offence, so his profession is the act of another, but his by Imputation: The same Father also saith, 
Aug. in Epi. 105  We confess that as they be born again by the Ministry of Baptisers, so they believe by the hearts and mouths of the Confessors. And in another place, 
Serm. 10. de verb. Apostoli.  Accommodat illis Mater Ecclesia aliorum pedes, ut veniant aliorum cor, ut credant: Our Mother the Church dareth them other men's feet, that they may come: and other men's hearts that they may believe. 
Math. 9.2. Mat. 2.5. Luk. 5 20.  And as the Palsie-man in the Gospel fared the better for the faith of his friends: so the little Children are by these means qualified for holy Baptism: and being baptised are no less bound to observe the Faith of Christians, than the Jews (infants, as well as others) bond themselves by Circumcision to the Law of Moses. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor (saith the Apostle) to do the whole Law, Gal. 5.3. Whereto agreeth that which the Scripture also saith, That he who names the name of Christ must departed from iniquity, 2 Tim. 2.19. We have therefore Sureties, who are examined, not altogether in regard of the Infant, but also in some respect in regard of themselves, that thereby it may appear, whether they be fit to undertake for the Child for which they come to answer. For they be Sureties for the Child, and in the name of the Child they do promise and vow that which the Child is afterwards bound to perform. To which end is Confirmation after Baptism, that when Children come to the years of discretion, and have learned; What their Godfathers and Godmothers promised for them, they may then themselves with their own mouths, and with their own consent openly before the Church ratify and confirm the same, and live by their own Faith: their Godfathers and Godmothers being in the mean time bound to teach them what a solemn Vow, Promise, and Profession they have made by them their Sureties, who are not only special witnesses of their naming and receiving into the Church, as God said to his Prophet, Esa. 8.2. But are also undertakers and special monitors for them. For if (as the Apostle teacheth, in the 1 Cor. 12.25) there is to be no schism in the body, but that the members should have the same care one for another; then much more are they bound, who specially undertake for others.  
In the phrase of some kind of men (as our Hooker speaketh) they use to be termed witnesses, as if (saith he) they came but to see and testify what is done. It savoureth more of piety to give them their old accustomed names of Fathers and Mothers in God, whereby they are well put in mind what affection they ought to bear towards those innocents', for whose religious education the Church accepteth them as pledges. This therefore is their own duty: But because the answer which they make to the usual demands of stipulation proposed in Baptism is not [absolutely] their own, the Church doth best to receive it of them in that form which best showeth whose the act is.  
And thus much for satisfaction concerning Interrogatories in holy Baptism: at which whilst you scoff and are pleased to make yourself merry, you see what a scorn you put upon the Church of God, which hath been acquainted with this custom long before the novel times of upstart Popery.   

DIALOGUE.  Goe 
What doth the minister after he hath received these feigned answers?  Min. 
He doth baptise the Infant, and doth mark him on the forehead with a Cross, which doth offend many, because they take it to be the mark of the Beast, mentioned, Revel. 14.9.  Gent. 
Why do they take it to be the mark of the beast?  Min. 
Because there is no one thing in all Popery, set on the forehead, and on the hand, but a cross; made on the forehead by the Priest in Baptism, and by the Bishop on the right hand in Confirmation, saying, Signaculum Christi, in manu tua dextra trado tibi: therefore they say, that it is a mark wherewith the Beast doth cause all that are of his Church to be marked; according as it is written, that he hath made all, both small and great, rich and poor, bond and free; to receive a mark on the forehead, and on the right hand, Rev. 13.16.  
It is written, Rev. 14.9. that if any receive his mark on the forehead, and on the hand, he shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, therefore some do keep their children unbaptised, rather than have them marked with the mark of the beast.   

ANSWER.  
By that signe made on our foreheads is intented that we should be put in remembrance of that Christian warfare which every one baptised is to enter into, and to continue in unto the end, if he will be saved, See Rom. 8.13. 1 Tim. 6.1. Revel. 2.10,11. & chap. 21.7,8. So that we are not signed with the sign of the cross in token of any superstitious matter, but of a matter most necessary: For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh; but are commanded to fight the good fight of Faith, to endure hardness as a good soldier of Jesus Christ, to be strong in the Lord and in power of his might, to put on the whole armour of God whereby we may be able to stand against the wiles of the Devil; and are taught not to glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto us, and we unto the world: nor is it but written, that Michael and his Angels, fight against the Dragon and his Angels, Revel. 12.7. And therefore we are to acquit ourselves like men, and must confess the Faith of Christ crucified, and must take unto us the whole armour of God, whereby we may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all to stand, Eph. 6.13. Galat. 6.14. 1 Tim. 6.12. 2 Tim. 2.3, etc.  
Now all these are main Christian duties, and who so unfeignedly endeavoureth to keep them, needs not in any wise be offended at the sign used to put him in mind of them; but will rather thank God, that he is born in such a Church, where not only the true Christian life is taught by tongue and pen, but is also signified by some ceremony, for ones more remembrance of the same. The Israelites had their fringes on the borders of their garments, with a ribbon of blue, that looking thereupon they might remember all the Commandments of the Lord, Num. 15.38,39. Nor hath the Christian Church but power to appoint Ceremonies, though the particulars be not as directly specified as was that to them of Israel: for which we have a text, in 1 Cor. 14.40. She therefore useth this godly Ceremony of signing with the sign of the Cross, for a good signification, and transgresseth not, no more than those in the days of Joshua, who built an Altar (for which they had no command in the Law of Moses) in regard they did it (as do we) for a good signification, See Josh. 22.22.  
And whereas you tell us of the mark of the Beast: The mark of the Beast is surely one thing; and the sign of the Cross, another. They are threatened with damnation which receive the mark of the Beast: But is an Infant therefore damned because he reciveth at another's hand the sign of the Cross upon his forehead, and is no agent in it himself nor able to know either what's done or threatened? You show yourself a proper Divine, I promise you; and would broach such an inequality in the ways of God, as is utterly condemned in his holy word. The soul (saith the Lord) that sinneth, it shall die: the Son shall not bear the iniquity of the Father, neither shall the Father bear the iniquity of the Son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. Ezek. 18.20. which, if it make not against you, let yourself be judge.  
Besides, as we are free enough from receiving any mark on the hand at Confirmation; so are we as able to show, that the sign of the Cross was in use before the Beast that should impose it was born: yea, even whilst the Bishops of Rome were glorious Martyrs, and the Church of God under the troubles of the persecuting Emperors; witness those proofs which are brought out of Tertullian, Origen, and Cyprian by the learned, to show that they used it, In immortali lavacro, in the immortal laver. See Tertull. lib. de resur. Carnis. Cypr. Epist. 56. Jeu lib. 4. Epist. 6. & lib. de Lapsis sub init. & lib. ad Demetrianum: In the first of which quotations out of Cyprian, the said Father counseleth, that the forehead be guarded, that thereby the sign of God may be kept in safety; and in the second, he speaks of the same sign upon the forehead; and in the third he saith, that by this Sacrament [viz. Baptism] and sign we are enroled. Nor doth Bishop Jewel but grant, that the sign of the Cross among the Christians was had in great regard. Neither when the Papists charge us with Novelties, can you better know how to answer their objection, then truly to tell them, that their abuses are new, but the things which they abused we retain in their primitive use, and forsake only the novel corruption: and for as much as this Ceremony was abused (as is confessed) in time of Popery, it doth plainly imply that it was well used before Popery; as King James of blessed memory hath very worthily affirmed in the conference holden at. Hampton Court.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What fault do they find with the Prayers that are made at the administration of Baptism?  Min. 
They find fault with the Popish errors that are in them, as in the first Prayer before Baptism, it is written, that God hath sanctified the flood Jordan, and all other waters, to the my stycall washing away of sin. The truth is, that there is no mystical washing away of sin in water, but a true and real washing away of sin in the blood of Christ. 1 Joh. 1.7. The water in Baptism doth but signify, that as foul things are washed and made clean in water, so the souls of the Elect, defiled with sin, are made clean in the blood of Christ, 1 Joh. 1.7.   

ANSWER.  
You come now to find fault with the Prayers that are made at the adminstration of baptism, and to pick some holes in their popish coats: for in your esteem they want not their popish errors. But shall I tell you, Saint Austin speaks in the same language that you mention to be in the first Prayer before baptism: else he had never said in his 29 Sermon Detempore, That Christ in the waters of Jordan consecrated the waters for the reparation of humane kind under baptism. And a little after, Et quia (saith he) per universum mundum sacramentum Baptismi humano generi opus erat, omnibus aquis benedictionem dedit, quando in Jordanis alveum unica ac singulari piet ate descendit: Tunc enim Christum Dominum non tam lavit undo, quam lota est. That is, And because (saith he) the Sacrament of Baptism was needful for mankind throughout the whole world, he gave a blessing to all waters, when in his only and fingular piety he descended into the river Jordan: For then the water did not so much wash Christ the Lord, as was washed by him.  
The truth than is, that this is no popish error in the judgement of so holy a Father, although now a days any thing be popery which a peevish precisian thinks good to stumble at.  
As little (or less) cause have you to quarrel about the mystical washing away of sin: for a thing may be really performed, although the manner be mystical, and the means such as doth not discover in what maaner the reality of the thing is done. So that although it be true that the souls which are defiled with sin, are washed in the blood of Christ, which Saint John affirmeth; yet the virtue and efficacy of his blood shed is conveyed and sealed to us by such ways and means, as himself hath appointed: otherwise he had never said, that Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Joh. 3.5.  
But the water you say, doth but signify. Signify it doth: but to say it doth but signify, is to assign unto it no end but only to teach the mind, by other senses, that which the word doth teach by hearing. And unto Infants which are not capable of instruction, who would not think it a mere superfluity that any Sacrament is administered, if to administer the Sacraments be but to teach receivers what God doth for them? But when our Saviour Christ saith, as in the text already mentioned, that except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God; the truth is, that as the Spirit is a necessary inward cause; so Water is a necessary outward mean: why else are we likewise taught in another text, That Baptism is a bath of Regeneration, Tit. 3.5. And that with water Christ doth purify and cleanse his Church? Eph. 5.26. Let then the Sacraments have their due: for though they do not confer grace ex opere operato, as the Papists teach, yet they confer grace ex opere operantis, because the holy Ghost worketh both in and by those holy Rites and Institutions.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
In another prayer, the Minister prayeth that the Infant may receive remission of sins, by spiritual regeneration. The truth is, that the Children of God have their sins forgiven, and are sanctified by Faith Rom, 5.1. and not by spiritual regeneration, which is but an effect of Faith purifiing the heart, Act. 15.9. Or to speak more plainly, it is God that justifieth, Rom. 8.33. by accepting of the sufferings and obedience of Christ, as a sufficient recompense and satisfaction, and doth by Faith assure the hearts of his Children, that for the merits of the sufferings and obedience of Christ, his wrath is pacified and his Justice satisfied.   

ANSWER.  
And is it possible, that you should be offended with this Prayer, because the Minister prayeth that the Infant may receive remission of sins by spiritual regeneration? Why man, Remission of sins is plainly promised to them that receive Baptism aright; as we read in Act. 2.38. It is therefore the Doctrine of the Catholic Church to believe one Baptism for the remission of sins; as I am sure you know, and are bound unto it, except you mean to be an Heretic. Let it then (good Sir) be lawful to pray for that which the Scripture promiseth, and to demean ourselves as we ought in the use of these holy mysteries. Simon Magus indeed received no benefit by Baptism, because he was not disposed aright: but yet nevertheless where no obstacle comes between, even the sins of the Baptised are remitted.  
Your false tenet is also again confuted by that which the devout Ananias said to Paul at the time of his Conversion; And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptised, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord, Act. 22.16. See then your error now at full: not only remission spoken of, but also Prayer mentioned. If therefore your accusation be just, let any man that will but come and see as he ought to do, be judge.  
You have alleged Scripture, but very impertinently: and as for your first quotation, out of Rom. 5.1. there is no such thing there as you speak of, concerning sanctification by Faith: Put on your Spectacles, when you look again.  
But I conclude this answer in the words of that worthy Hooker. 
Eccles. Polit. lib. 5. sect. 60 pag. 132. 133.  There were (saith he) of the old Valentinian Heretics, some which had Knowledge in such admiration, that to it they ascribed all, and so despised the Sacraments of Christ, pretending that as Ignorance had made us subject to all misery, so the full redemption of the inward man, and the work of our restauration, must needs belong unto Knowledge only. They draw near unto this error, who fixing wholly their minds on the known necessity of Faith, imagine that nothing but Faith is necessary for the attainment of all grace; Yet is it a branch of Belief that Sacraments are in their place no less required than belief itself.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
In another Prayer, thanks is given to God for regenerating the Infant with his holy Spirit. The truth is, that the Children of God do receive the Spirit of God to Regenerate them, not by springling of water in Baptism but by hearing the Gospel Preached, 2 Cor. 3.8. Act. 10.44. To make mention of all the Popish errors that are in other Prayers and Collects, would be too tedious.   

ANSWER.  
To be regenerated is to receive new motions of the mind by the holy Ghost, and to be made a new creature. Whereto agreeth that which Melancthon writeth, 
Melanct. in Loc. pag. 246.  Cum spiritus sanctus novos motus, & novam vitam afferat, dicitur haec conversio Regeneratio. But this (you say) is done, not by the sprinkling of water in Baptism, but by hearing the Gospel Preached: and hereupon you point us to two places of Scripture. I shall show you two other, which are more plain and proving; the one is, Jam. 1.18. the other is in 1 Pet. 1.23. In that of S. james, the words bethese; of his own will begat he us, with the Word of Truth, And in S. Peter, thus; Being born again not of corruptible, seed but of incorruptible by the Word of God which liveth & abideth forever. And yet notwithstanding, the scripture saith elsewhere; That a man must be born again of Water and the Spirit, Joh. 3.5. And in another text, Baptism is expressly termed the Laver of Regeneration, Tit. 3.5. to both which places in a former answer, I have already pointed you. So that Regeneration is wrought, you see, by several means: not by the word alone, but by Baptism as well as by the word. The one you mention, the other is forgotten; nay, it is altogether denied by you. But be better advised, and cross not the Scriptures, good Sir, I beseech you.  
And for a full clearing, let it be known that what the word doth, in that which you mention, is to be understood of those who be Adulti, or men grown; who have lost and forfeited their Baptismal Regeneration by actual gross sins not repent off, yielded unto without any reluctancy, or striving against: the apprehension of what they see in the world as soon as they come to knowledge leading them into a wrong habit both of desiring and doing, whereby they walk not like children of the light; who must be therefore spoken unto as to men unregenerate, because a new kind of regeneration, at least a new degree thereof; must be wrought in them by the Ministry of the word, which by the Law brings them to repentance, and by the Gospel to Faith in Christ; these graces being further fortified by the second Sacrament, which upon due examination of themselves they are bound to receive. Dicitur quidam à nonnullis, concedendam non esse● Regenerationem, nisi per verbum, quod est semen Dei: Petrus quip ait, priori Epist. cap. 1. nos esse renatos baudquaquam semine corruptibili, sed incorruptibili, quod est sermo Dei. Caeterum ad id respondemus, de adult is hominibus id esse intelligendum; De infantibus autem non it a rem se habere, nisi velimus Hebraeorum filios melioris facere sortis, quam Christianorum; as Peter Martyr speaketh, 
See Peter Mar, in his common Places, pag. 838.  That is, It is said indeed by some, that regeneration is not to be granted, but by the Word, which is the seed of God: because Peter saith, in the first Epist. chapter 1. That we are born again in no wise by corruptible seed, but by incorruptible, which is the word of God. But to that we answer, That it is to be understood of men grown; but concerning Infants the case is otherwise, except we would make the children of the Hebrews of a better condition, than the Children of Christians. So then, albeit we know this Sacrament of Baptism to be effectual to the regeneration of Infants, yet are we not to grant Baptismal grace in itself sufficient to the salvation of men grown. 
Mr. Tho. Bedf. in Sermon on Rom. 6,7. pag. 58.  It is fitly therefore said by a learned Preacher, to be available for the state of infancy, to them a state of salvation, as the Church teacheth them to style it, and to bless God for it. But afterwards when they become actual sinners, they must become actual penitents. And as they have contracted a new guilt: so they must seek for a new grace: otherwise the first will be found insufficient to salvation; Thus fare that author. And so you see how little you have gotten by your restriction of regeneration to the word alone: For though you were so peremptory in your assertion concerning it, as that you could say, The truth is, That the Children of God do receive the Spirit of God to regenerate them, not by sprinkling of water in baptism, but by bearing the Gospel Preached; yet the truth is, that Truth is nothing near you: for you affirm falsely, and will by degrees be found still to be full of so many malicious slanders, absurdities, lies and errors, as will make Orthodox and quiet men cry out that you are not so much tedious as troublesome both to the Church and State, as be also the rest of your crew which now adays do use to show their heads and faces with such audacious boldness, as makes it be admired that such spirits should be amongst us; and be the first (forsooth) for reformation. But I pray God work all for the best, and settle us so in peace, that Truth, Unity and Goncord may flourish amongst us: and seeing (oh Lord) the foolish ones do reproach thee daily, do thou arise and maintain thine own cause, in spite of all that shall oppose it.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What do they say of the Catechism in the Service-book?  Min. 
They say it is full of Popish errors, as first in the Rubric before the Catechism, it is written, that Children baptised, have all things necessary to salvation, and are undoubtedly saved. The truth is, that they have no knowledge of sin, nor of the wrath and curse of God due to sin, nor of Christ, nor of the Articles of the Christian Faith, and therefore have neither Faith nor Repentance, without which none can be saved. It is true, that Infants, born of the Elect, are undoubtedly saved by virtue of God's everlasting Covenant of grace, so many as are of the number of the Elect; I say, so many as are of the number of the Elect, because many of the Elect that are now Saints in Heaven, have brought forth children that are Reprobates and damned souls in Hell, For, Adam had Cain as well as Abel, and Abraham had Ishmaell as well as Isaac, and Isaac had Esau (whom God hated) as well as Jacob whom God loved.   

ANSWER.  
Well, and what of all this? Are not Infants baptised because they are born in original sin? and is not original sin washed away in baptism? And if so, than who will not say that a child baptised is undoubtedly saved? For though the root of corruption doth still remain, yet the guilt is pardened: and so, such a child dying before it hath procured a new guilt through the fructification of the branches which spring from the foresaid root, is by virtue of holy baptism so washed as it may be saved. For baptism is not a mere naked sign or badge of Christianity, but an ordinary and efficatious means of Regeneration; as I have already proved, out of plain texts of holy Scripture.  
And where as you come in again, according to your wont manner, with The truth is that they have no knowledge of sin, nor of the wrath and curse of God due to sin, nor of Christ, nor of the Articles of the Christian Faith, and therefore have neither faith nor repentance, without which none can be saved, it is further answered, in the words of one well able to satisfy, 
See M. T. Bedf. Treat. of the Sacr. pag. 192.  viz. That in the Baptism of Infants, the spirit worketh not as a moral agent to proffer grace to the will, but as a natural, or rather supernatural Agent, to work it in the will, to put grace into the heart, conferring upon them seminal and initial grace, which doth not presuppose Faith, but is in itself the seed of Faith; To parents converted, Baptism conveyed (as did Circumcision to Abraham) a superaddition of further grace, to what they had extraordinarily received: But to their Children Baptism conveyed (as did Circumcision to Isaac) the first seeds of grace, and regeneration: Add this, that the Faith of the Parent is sufficient to qualify the child for Baptism, yea, for the grace of Baptism; the child I say, in whom as yet corruption of nature, being scant active, calleth for no act of personal grace to remove the bar of guilt: polluted he is, but by the act of another, not by consent of his own; therefore the faith of the Parent sufficeth to procure for the child the Sacrament, and the benefit thereof. Yea, and let me also add, That the right qualification of Godfathers and Godmothers, is here also to be regarded; as is formerly showed in answer to the exceptions taken against Interrogatories: where also is showed how the profession of Faith and repentance is performed.  
But you go on, and tell us that they be the Infants of the Elect only which are undoubtedly saved, by virtue of God's everlasting covenant of Grace: and yet not these neither, though born of such parents as you speak off, except they also be in the number of the Elect. In which, this is granted; that it is by virtue of God's covenant with the Parents, that Infants have right of title or interest to baptism, which at the first they were admitted unto, even as soon as ever their Parents being converted, were baptised. For, in this, the proceeding of the Converts was surely such when the Apostles baptised whole households, as when the covenant, and what was thereupon commanded concerning Circumcision, was made with Abraham. The covenant is made, and no sooner made, but he with all the males in his house were circumcised, young and old So doubtless no sooner was the covenant of grace ratified betwixt God and the Parents by baptism, but presently their Children or Infants of the same family are accounted holy and Baptised. It is plain and evident, that unto those to whom Saint Peter preached, in the second chapter of the Acts, 
Act. 2.39.  and bade them repent and be baptised, he said The promise is made to you and your Children. Nor doth Saint Paul but also teach the same unto the Gentiles, in the first Epistle written to the Corinthians, 
Cor. 7.14.  the seventh chapter, at the fourteenth verse. And where the means is alike to all, God's Election which you speak of, appears not to be but according to his foreknowledge of the effects of his means graciously and of mere mercy offered to us. 
● Pet. 1.10.  For though many be called, yet few are chosen; because all the called of God are not found with their wedding garments on, they do not make their calling and Election sure. But to be so searching as to put a difference among Infants, who can no ways hinder the efficacy of this Sacrament, or bar themselves of the benefit or fruit thereof, is more than you are able how to manifest. For though many of the Elect, that are now Saints in heaven, have brought forth children that are reprobates and damned souls in Hell: yet if they had done well, the Scripture tells us they had been accepted; as is particularly instanced in one of them whom you have mentioned, namely Cain, Gen. 4.7. And if hereby you think it followeth, that Election is not until after Vocation: then for your further satisfaction, I must tell you, that in respect of God's purpose and decree, Election is granted to be before the foundation of the World; but not re ipsa, not so in very deed. For both his Election and Calling to the Kingdom of Grace, and out of those his Election of some to the Kingdom of Glory, is according to his eternal purpose; yet not actuated, but in time, neither the one nor the other: Not the one, for I will call them my people which were not my people, and her beloved which was not beloved: Not the other, for When the King came in and saw one there which had not on a wedding garment, he commanded him to be bound hand and foot and cast into utter darkness; 
Rom. 9.25. Hos. 2.23. Mat. 22.11,13.  To which action declared by that Parable, our Saviour presently subjoins this saying, 
Mat. 22.14.  For many are called but few are chosen. Where note I pray you, that they are actually elected who are found to have the wedding garment on, walking like Children of the light which they received by their Election unto grace, and do so come under the use of the means and are benefitted thereby, as that they make their Calling and Election sure: for such as these, are undoubtedly clothed with the robe of Christ's righteousness; they have put off the old Man, and by a true and a lively Faith (which by the means afforded them is wrought in them upon their submission and applying thereunto) they have put on the New: Christ dwells in them; yea, their life is hid with Christ, and when Christ who is their life shall appear, then shall they also appear with him in glory. Coloss. 3.3,4.  
And then next, as for that of Ishmael; It is true that he was the son of Abraham, as well as Isaac; but that he was damned, is more than I dare determine: especially seeing when Abraham prayed unto God, 
Gen. 17,18,20.  that he might live in his sight; the Lord gave him answer, That as concerning Ishmael, he had heard him. If you say that this is meant only in regard of his temporal prosperity, then must it be also granted, that he is cast out of Abraham's house, and 
* Aliud nihil erat, quam reprobari à typica illa haereditate terrae Canaan, quam Isaaco Deus assignabat.  differenced from Isaac, not because he was a Reprobate (as you would have him) but because he might not be heir with Isaac. For, Cast out the bondwoman and her Son: the Son of the Bondwoman shall not be heir with the Son of the Freewoman, Gen. 21.10. All which comes to one and the same, and doth either way make well against you.  
And last of all, as for that which you have concerning Jacob and Esau, how that God loved the one and hated the other; there be them who think that it may be taken as if it should be said, He loved the one less than the other: and not as if it were absolutely meant of an hostile hate, or of an hatred to damnation; but of a negative hatred, which in this seems to be no other thing then a posthabitation concerning the land of Promise, and a denial of the privileges belonging to the birthright, whereby the one is preferred before the other. For as Scharpius mentions in his Symphonia, Odium duo significat; Primò, affectum amori contrarium, vel hostilem animum, quo erga Esawm Deus affectus non fuit. Secundo significat aliquid in re aliqua negligere & alteri postponere; it a Deus Esawm odio habuit, cum illi Jacobum praetulit, & Esawm eaten us pra Jacobo neglexit, ut ad illum (licet primogenitum) ne jus primogeniturae, nec promiss terrae Canaani, nec origo Messiae secundum carnem pertinuerit. A like phrase of speech is in Deuteronomy (chap. 21.15.) where the words are concerning a man with two wives, the one whereof he is said to hate, the other to love; and this because the one was less loved th●n the other: for so we are taught in the 29 chap. of Genesis, at the 30, 31 verses, even concerning Rachel and Leah, the two wives of Jacob. After the same manner likewise are those words of our Saviour Christ to be understood, in Luk. 14.26. where he saith, that If any man come to me, and hate not his Father and Mother, etc. he cannot be my Disciple. Thus our Saviour: Now we know that a man is bound to honour his Father and Mother, to love them and not to hate them: and yet he that shall love either Father or Mother more than Christ, is not worthy of Christ, Matth. 10.37. And thus doth one place explain another.  
But howsoever the meaning be; that what you mention is not to be referred precisely to the particular persons of Jacob and Esau (whereupon you lose that you strive for) is plain enough. First, because God's Oracle to Rebecca was concerning two Nations, Gen. 25.23. where the words be these, And the Lord said unto her, two Nations are in thy womb, and two manner of pe●ple shall be separated from thy bowels: and the one people shall be stronger than the other people: and the elder shall serve the younger. Duae gentes, nen in seipsis, sed in suis patribus; secundum Prophetiam quoque ipsius Isaac, quando Minorom pro Majore benedixit. And secondly, because the Prophet Malachy declares the same; nay, he shows the accomplishment thereof in the Israelites and Edomites, the one whereof were descended of Jacob, the other of Esau; Malach. chap. 1. The Paraphrase whereof, is as followeth. Ecce populus Israeliticus, ex Jacobo oriundus, populus iste est, quem singulariter dilexit Deus quippe cui ex mer●… dilecti●…e & gratia terram prom●ssam, melle & lacte fluentem, Abrahamo & Isaaco olim promissam, velut haereditatem possidendam dedit: Populus verò Edomeus ex Esau progenitus, populus iste est, quem Deus amore isto singulari complecti & favore tam prolixo adficere noluit, quip cui horrida & inculta loea, montes Seir vastos saxosis, desertosque, & cum fertili ista terra promissa mini●… conserendos, habitandos dedit, ut servilis borum, filialis istorum conditio, juxta praegressum de illorum capitibus or aculum, clare elucesceret. And was it not, that out of both these, Saint Paul cited that which you have aimed at? and in Saint Paul's Epistles are some things hard to be understood, as Saint Peter tells us, 2 Pet. 3.16. Wherefore let me advise you, not to be rash in citing from thence things hard to be understood: nor come with things obscure, against what is elsewhere plain and manifest; for than you will neither benefit yourself, nor truly instruct others. The elder shall serve the younger: understand that, not of the persons of Esau and Jacob, for Esau never served Jacob; but of the two 
* Major populus serviet Minori, id est, Primogenitus populus haeres non trit terrae Canaan, sed secundogenitus. Propositum enim Dei erat, vocare semen quos & quales vult.  Nations which were to come of them, as the words of God declare; which said not to Rebecca, Two men, but two Nations are in thy womb. And then whereas the Apostle presently subjoineth, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated, it is not to be taken as if it were spoken before the children were born, as was the former Oracle: for this was said many ages after by the Prophet Malachy, and spoken likewise not of two men, but of two people, as in the said Prophet is apparent. Besides the very phrase of speech declareth that this was not (as the other) spoken before the Children were born: for than it had not been in the Preterperfect, but in the Future tense: So that all the reference which this can have unto the former, is but to show how God's purpose took effect in preferring the Nations which came of Jacob, before the people which came of Esau, which he terms love and hatred, and is found to be so in the sense already mentioned.  
But whereto serve those examples, if they be not to show that God irrespectively decreed to save the persons of some of them in particular, and absolutely in particular, according to the Council of his will, to damn the others? Verily, he that shall read the Scriptures, and find it 
* Ezek. 18 32. & ch. 33.11. 1 Tim 2.4. 2 Pet 3.9.  written that God would not the death of him that dyech, would have all to be saved, and is not willing that any one should perish, will scarce be persuaded that God hath absolutely decreed any man's damnation: I answer therefore, God's love to mankind is such, that not only is the promise of Grace Universal, but also free, and taken by Faith alone: insomuch that the Apostle to the Romans plainly excludes all prerogative of the flesh and merit of works, and concludes that every one who believes shall not be ashamed. For there is no difference between the Jew and the Gentile; For he that is Lord over all, is rich unto all that call upon him. And hereto serve those famous Types and Heads of Nations which he propoundeth, when he brings in the sons of Abraham and of Isaac already mentioned: which types (as Hemmingius speaketh) 
Hemming. Syntagm. capit. De Praedestinat. sect 32.  are to be fitted after this manner, viz. that in certain commodities belonging to this life, all which are born of the seed of Abraham and Isaac, are not reckoned for their sons: Much less in things spiritual are they accounted as sons, who draw their original from those holy Fathers. Wherefore, even as in profits and privileges belonging to this life, they only are reputed the sons of whom the holy Patriarches had the promises: So in things Spiritual, they only are to be reckoned as sons of Abraham, whose faith is in the free promise; and not those who exult and swell by reason of the Prerogative of the flesh, as did the carnal Jews whose rejection he showeth to be just, notwithstanding they could say we have Abraham to our Father. 
* Similiter nunc propositum hoc Dei manet, quo Judaeos legem praefracte sectari volentes, licet illi praeferri debere videantur Gentilibus, semen vocare non vult, sed omnes & solos eos, sive Judaei sunt, qui Evangelio filii ejus credunt, et si hi illis deteriores & indigniores esse videantur.    

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
This error you say is in the Rubric, what is in the Chatechisme?  Min. 
In the Catechism it is affirmed, that Christ hath redeemed all Mankind. The truth is, that Christ came into the world, not to redeem all Mankind, but the Elect only; therefore the Evangelist Saint Luke setting forth the Genealogy of Christ, beginneth from Joseph and ascendeth to Adam, and from Adam doth descend to Sheth, who was the first of Elect that was born after the death of Abel, and maketh no mention of Cain, nor of any of his posterity. And Saint Matthew beginning from Abraham, and from Abraham descendeth to Isaac, and from Isaac to Jacob, and maketh no mention of Ishmael nor of Esau, nor of any that came of them.  
Also our Saviour Christ saith, that he gave his life a ransom for many, Matth. 20.28. and that his blood was shed for many, Matth. 26.28. He doth not say, that his blood was shed for all mankind, but for many, that is, for the Elect only, who are many, though but few in comparison of the multitude that are Reprobates.   

ANSWER.  
When our Church teacheth her Children to say, I believe in God the son, who hath redeemed me and all mankind, she hath respect to the ample latitude of the merit of Redemption wrought by Jesus Christ; which is such, and so large, as that it extends itself to all: it excludes none, but hath satisfied Justice, and made a way for all men to attain unto mercy. For if God be not willing that any one should perish, as Saint Peter speaketh; 
2 Pet. 2.9.  but that all men should be saved, as Saint Paul to Timothy declareth: 
1 Tim. 2.4.  then surely the Son of God, who came to seek and to save that which was lost, and to do the will of his Father, laid down his life in common for all, that thereby a way might be made for all to attain unto mercy. Christ indeed gave his life for his sheep, and laid it down for his friends, but not for them only: For He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world, 1 Joh. 2.2. And well might he say he gave his life a ransom for many, and that his blood was shed for many, who shed his blood for all, and gave himself a ransom for all, 1 Tim. 2.6. Nor do we but read, that Judas was one of them to whom Christ said, My blood is shed for you, Luk. 22.20. and yet Judas was a Reprobate. To which agreeth that of Saint Peter, concerning some who should bring in privily damnable Heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, 2 Pet. 2.1. And again saith another scripture, Of how much sorer punishment shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the Covenant wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite to the spirit of Grace? Hebr. 10.29. And in the second chapter of the same Epistle, the Apostle saith expressly, 
Heb. 2.9.  But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the Angels, for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour, that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man; And again, The Lord (saith the Prophet) hath laid on him the iniquity of us all, Esa. 53.6. And I (saith Christ) if I be lifted up from the Earth, will draw all men unto me, Joh. 12.32. And in the 2 Corinth. 5.14. Christ died for all. And in Tit. 2.11. The grace of God that bringeth Salvation, hath appeared to all men. And in Rom. 5.18. As by the offence of one, judgement came upon all men to condemnation: even so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life: as our common translation reads it.  
And will you, notwithstanding all this, deny that the price paid by Christ, was not paid for all, nor made for all? The truth is, that it hath not been beneficial to all: and in that respect our Saviour's words are manifest, that he shed his blood for many. And so the Apostle likewise meaneth; expressly declaring, that we trust in the living God, who is she Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe, 1 Tim. 4.10. you see then that God excludes none, but those that exclude themselves by unbelief. For though Christ hath not gained all, yet nevertheless he hath died for all; as Chrysost. speaketh. 
Chrysost. in Rom. 14.  He hath done that which was his part to do: if therefore others will not do that which is theirs, they must (notwithstanding Christ's death) be damned. Ideo passus est, ut tolleret peecatum Mundi. Si quis autem in Christum non credit, generali beneficio ipse se frodat: ut siquis clausis fenestris radios solis excludat, saith Saint Ambrose: 
Ambr. Serm. 8. in Psal. 118.  That is, Christ therefore suffered that he might take away the sin of the world. But if any one believe not in Christ, he defrauds himself of that general benefit: as any one, by having his windows shut, excludes the light of the Sun. In medio Temple misericordia est, non in angulo aut diversorio: In communi posita est, offertur omnibus, & nemo illius expers nisi qui renuit, as saith Saint Bernard 
Bern. Serm. in purif. pag. 101.  which is as if he should say, Although Christ's merits are common to all, and that he keeps open house to all comers; yet those only have full benefit by them that lay hold upon him. God loved the World indeed when he gave his only begotten son: howbeit, they only shall not perish but have life everlasting, who believe on him, Joh. 3.16. So then, that Christ's precious blood hath greater efficacy or force in some then in others, is not the fault of him who did so well impart it, but of them who do so ill employ it. And so, all this while, no error in our Common Catechism.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
It is also affirmed in the Catechism, that we are made the Children of God in Baptism. The truth is, that whosoever is not a child of God before he be baptised, shall never be a child of God, because all that are the children of God, were (before the world was) made the children of God, by virtue of God's eternal decree of Election.   

ANSWER.  
This is answered before: and therefore, to avoid prolixity and repetition, I shall justly pass it over.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
It also affirmeth, that there are two Sacraments generally as necessary to salvation; intimating that the Sacraments are necessary to salvation, so as if a child die before he be baptised, be shall be damned, which is the cause that Midwives, do take upon them to Baptise. Intimating also, that there are more Sacraments than two; therefore it is written in the Rubric 
* You would say, after: if you cared to relate things aright.  before the Communion, that every Parishioner shall communicate thrice in the year, and also receive the Sacraments; meaning the five Popish Sacraments: For there are none other.   

ANSWER.  
We teach indeed that Christ hath ordained in his Church, two Sacraments only as generally necessary to Salvation, viz. Baptism and the Supper of the Lord; and will you be he that shall blame us for it; These two, are said by the Ancients to flow out of Christ's side, when hanging upon the Cross for us, the soldier with his spear let out from thence Water and Blood, Joh. 19.34. It is therefore said, that This is he that came by Water and Blood even Jesus Christ; not by Water only, but by Water and Blood, 1 Joh. 5.6. And will you be he which shall not grant these two legitimate and true born Sacraments to be generally necessary to Salvation? Why then are they not left, either to be used, or not to be used, ad placitum, as every one pleaseth? The Scripture I am sure grants no such freedom: for generally and in ordinary they are necessary, and so commanded. If therefore the Spirit do convey grace to any without the use of the Sacraments, this is to be accounted extraordinary; no man in common is to rely upon it, but to use the ordinary means which Christ hath appointed. For what is sometimes done ex parte Dei, on God's part, in cases not of wilful neglect or contempt, but in cases of desire when the want proceeds from inevitable necessity, is not to be reckoned ex parte nostra, or by us, enough at other times to rest upon. Understand then this phrase, generally necessary, to be as much as commonly and in ordinary.  
And as for the morenesse, or super-duality of the Sacraments, which you say is here intimated: we answer, that in a large signification there may be, not only seven, but many Sacraments; but strictly and properly no more than these; only two, and true Sacraments. If our Church teach otherwise, then speak and spare not: till then be silent, and spare your breath to cool your broth; for there, it may be of more use than it can be here; especially if you could but remember what is delivered in that Homily which declareth, that Common Prayer and Sacraments ought to be administered in a known tongue. This is all that I shall need to say; your scruple is cleared fare enough.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
It affirmeth also, that Godfathers and Godmothers do promise and vow three things; first, that the Infant shall forsake the Devil and all his works, the pomps and vanities of the wicked world, and all the sinful lusts of the flesh; Secondly, that he shall believe all the Articles of the Christian Faith; Thirdly, that he shall keep Gods holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all the days of his life; which no man is able to do of himself.   

ANSWER.  
Here is nothing more than what we have had before, excepting a word or two about the keeping of God's commandments, which you say no man is able to do of himself. And doth not the very Catechism also teach the same, in the question next before the Lords Prayer? you are blind, sure; else you might have seen it. Let me therefore entreat you to look better about you, and although you cannot see wood for trees, be not (good Sir) angry at it.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
The truth is, that the Godfathers and Godmothers, do neither promise nor vow, that the infant shall do these things.  Gent. 
What then do they?  Min. 
They do nothing, but sergeant the Infant's voice, as if he were a conjured Ghost within every one of them, speaking and saying, that he doth all these things.   

ANSWER.  
This of the conjured Ghost pleaseth you (sure) very mightily, as well as that other of the witch, which you have mentioned, more than once: but harp on; The string which you harp so much upon, will break at last, and help but little, although for the present it may be used by the Minstrels of your own sect, to make the simple dance.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Are there any other things that do offend and discourage the people from coming into the Church till service be all read?  Min. 
Yes.  Gent. 
What are they?  Min. 
They are the perverting of the meaning of the holy Ghost, in many places of the Psalms, Epistles, and Gospels, by putting in, and leaving out of words, and also of the meaning of our Saviour Christ in many places of the Revelation.  Gent. 
Wherein is the meaning of the holy Ghost perverted, by putting in and leaving out of Words?  Min. 
In the Psalm 106.30. Phineas prayed, are put in for, Phineas executed judgement. Psal. 105.28. Not obedient, are put in for not disobedient. Psal. 125.3. these words, The rod of the ungodly cometh not on the lot of the righteous, are put in for resteth not on the lot of the righteous. In the Epistle on 
* You are deceived: it is in the Epistle on the Monday before Easter.  monday in Easter week, these words, Israel remembered are put in, for he, that is, God remembered. To make mention of all the places in the Psalms, Epistles and Gospels, would be too tedious.   

ANRWER.  
I verily think, that if what you here mention, had been a thing of moment, it had been amended when it was urged in the Conference at Hampton Court, where so judicious a King (as our late King James of blessed memory) heard all the grievances which then were brought: among the which, this in particular was one. And verily, this is certain, that words in the Original do many times admit of a divers and doubtful reading, and may indifferently be taken either the one way or the other: as is easy to instance, even in one of those Scriptures which you have mentioned. For whereas you say Phineas prayed, are put in for Phineas executed judgement; I answer, the original word in that very text, hath divers significations, and is therefore translated diversely: for in the Septuagint it is, Phineas did propitiate or pacify God: in the Chalde, he prayed; And in later ones, it is translated, He executed judgement.  
And as For the next, if it cannot be answered with the like facility, then that which followeth may: for whereas the words are barely turned, The rod of the ungodly cometh not on the lot of the righteous; you can but open the meaning, and say That it cometh not, so as to rest or abide upon it; and yet cometh nevertheless.  
After this you tell us of another pervertion, in the Epistle on Monday in Easter week, where these words, Israel remembered, are put in for He, that is, God remembered. But shall I tell you, there is no such thing at all in that Epistle: you do but dream sure, or take your wares upon trust; it had been else in the Epistle on the Monday before Easter, where we read indeed, thus: Yet remembered Israel the old times of Moses: which (as you say) should be He, that is, God remembered. This is your gloss; and yet the Geneva noteth, that the word He hath relation to the people of Israel, who being afflicted called to remembrance God's benefits, which he had bestowed upon their Fathers in times past: which is also the way that is taken in our translation used in the Service-book, both in this and in some such other passages as are either doubtful, or stand in need of explanation, which are rather rendredin a mean between the liberty of paraphrasts & literal rigour, of an obscure translation, than otherwise; and hath ever been judged the fittest for public audience, witness the practice of all Nations, Greeks, Latins, Persians, Syrians, Aethtopians, Arabians, as Hooker noteth.  
And so also for that other [of not obedient, & of not disobedient] it is much after the same manner: & translated as S. Matthew once translated a place out of the Prophet Mich: For in Mic. 5.2. we read that Bethlem was the least, Minima existendo in ducibus Jehudae: and yet in Matth. 2.6. we find it turned, Thou Bethlem not the least; the one regarding the quantity of the place, the other the dignity. So in this of the Psalmist, They were not obedient is true, if it be applied to Pharaoh and the Egyptians: although not of such an exact truth as the very letter of the original verity may import, by referring the speech to Moses and Aaron, as the most do; or to the Signs wrought in Egypt, as Junius doth; For then the righter reading is, They were not disobedient. So that you see, both upon what ground this reading standeth; and upon what ground it may be altered, if authority think fitting so to do, unto whom I leave it.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
You said, that the Service-book doth pervert the meaning of Christ in divers places of the Revelation, I pray you show me some of those places.  Min. 
The fourteenth Chapter is appointed to be read on Childermas day, after a Popish manner, for an Epistle, of purpose to pervert the meaning of Christ.   

ANSWER.  
What an uncharitable and a rash accusation have we here? I think that unless the Devil himself should interpret intentions, a worse interpretation could seldom have been hatched.   

DIALOGUE.  Gen 
What was the meaning of Christ in that Chapter?  Min. 
The meaning of Christ in that Chapter, was, and now is, to show, that in time of greatest persecutions, when the heathen persecuting Emperors, and after them the Popes did rage's most against the Christian Religion, and professors thereof, Christ had his 
* In his Church, I think you mean: else there will be scarce sense in the words.  Church (though invisible) 144000. preserved by him, and kept chaste and undefiled 
* This (with) I think you meant (from.)  with spiritual fornication of Idolatry.   

ANSWER.  
These 144000 were the particular true members of the Church militant in the days of Antichrist, set down in a mysterious number not easy to be understood: and were (without question) that seed of the woman mentioned, chap. 12.17. with whom the Beast should make war, chap. 13.7. yea these were all those faithful people of God, who from the beginning of Antichrists reign (which began about the year of our Lord 606, as is not improbable) professed the truth, even until the days of the Reformation of the Church afterwards mentioned; at which time these first fruits, day by day, were more & more increased; yea, these being contemporary with the beast, do plainly teach, that God had many thousands of his true worshippers, even in the darkest days of the great Antichrist, when there seemed very few or none remaining: For the Papacy creeping in, was like a botch or filthy sore, by which the fair face of the woman, in Chapter the twelfth, was over spread. The heathen persecuting Emperors were before this, even whilst the said woman, glorious in the Primitive times, was clothed with the Sun, Crowned with a Crown of twelve Stars, and trampled the Moon under her feet. Nor doth this but likewise seem to be parallel to those days of Elijah when there were 7000 scattered throughout the tribes of Israel, who were unknown: For so in these times there were many thousands, some in one Country, some in another, who did distaste the Idolatries & Superstitions of Rome: and with these the Lamb was present. Wherefore from hence we may easily give answer to that question, which the Papists, to no purpose, have often urged again us, saying; Where was your Church before Luther? It was amongst them like an handful of wheat in a Mountain of chaff. For this place (as in the 12 chapped. before) teacheth, that the Church hath had her latency, and yet was not extinguished no more than the Sun when he is hid by the covering of some dark or thick cloud. For look by how much the want of sincerity, and increase of the Pope's usurped tyranny prevailed, by so much was the Orthodox Church (being true professors of the primitive purity) obscured; and in respect of a greater multitude) so suppressed and clouded over, that a man would think there were scarce any such to be found at all. But true it is, they were but respectively invisible: and therefore persecuted by the Popish faction, through whom their faith was not seldom sealed with blessed martyrdom. And this chiefly is all that is meant by the latency of the true Church, and flying of the woman into the wilderness.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
How is the meaning of Christ perverted?  Min. 
By misapplying that to Children slain by Herod which was written of Christians persecuted and slain by the heathen persecuting Emperors and Popes.  Gent. 
Why doth the Pope pervert the meaning of Christ by misapplying that to the Children slain by Herod, which was written of Christ and his Church persecuted by the heathen Emperors and the Popes.  Min. 
The Pope and so many of our Lord Bishops, as are popish, do pervert the meaning of Christ, by causing that chapter to be read on Childermas day, of purpose to keep weak Christians in blindness, so as they shall not be able to give an answer to the Papists when they shall ask them, where their Religion and Church was an hundred years a go, before Martin Luther's time.   

ANSWER.  
Here's still more of your little charity: but me thinks you rather might have said, that as 144000. were seen standing with the Lamb upon mount Zion; so the blessed Innocents', as on this day murdered by cruel Herod, were witnesses to the Lamb, not by speaking but by suffering for Christ, and so both his name and his Father's name were written in their foreheads; and their voice was like the sound of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder, because in Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, weeping, and great mourning: and their crying was a song, a doleful ditty to their Parent's ear, Rachel weeping for her Children, and would not be comforted because they were not, but yet a pleasant and precious ditty in God's ear, so sweet as the voice of Harpers harping with their harps. Nor was this their sighing but as a new song, because they were the first fruits of Martyrs unto God. They may be also said to follow the Lamb whithersoever be went, 
Cant. 5.10.  because as the Lamb was white and ruddy; so they were white in their innocency, being Virgins in their chastity, without any guile in their mouth, or guile in their life: but in respect of their bloodshed for the Lamb, they were bloody, red and bleeding.  
So than you see, that although the Epistle was Historically true in what was afterwards, as in the former answer I have explained: yet fit to be read on that day, which you call Childermas day, in allusion to what was then.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What other meaning had Christ in that Chapter?  Min. 
His meaning was to show that in his good time he would give a free passage, and good success to the Preaching of the Gospel, as (thanks be to his holy Majesty) it hath had in many kingdoms since Martin Luther's time, and shall have every day more and more.   

ANSWER.  
This which you now mention is well spoken, and not amiss. For true it is, that at the fixed verse, the second part of the Chapter beginneth, wherein the downfall of Antichrist is proclaimed by three preaching Angels; the first whereof is said to fly through the midst of Heaven, having an everlasting Gospel to Preach. By which and those other Angels following, we are not to understand any celestial Angel in respect of the accomplishment of this Prophecy; but rather some special Ministers of God, whom the Lord stirred up as his instruments to work a reformation in the Church. And yet I deny not but that Saint John saw the representation of this (in that heavenly theatre wherein his visions were represented to him) in the seeming shape and person of a celestial Angel: which was but to show, that at the time appointed, God intended the accomplishment of this and the like appearances, by such instruments as were preordained for the same purpose.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
I am glad to hear this, I pray you go on, to show where the meaning of Christ is perverted.  Min. 
On Michaelmas day, the twelfth chapter, from the seventh verse to the thirteenth, is appointed to be read for an Epistle, it being no Epistle, but a prophecy, etc.   

ANSWER.  
The Corinthians, you know, are termed Paul's Epistle written in his heart: an Epistle, for that they were in stead of an Epistle; as Theophylact observeth. So this Scripture, howsoever not an Epistle properly, may stand in stead of an Epistle. For the denomination given to this and other portions of Scripture, taken out of the Prophets, Acts, and Revelation, is retained in respect of the greater part which is taken out of the Epistles, and not because they be in themselves Epistles properly: which why it should be quarrelled with, is more than needeth.  
But you go on, and tell us That it is a Prophecy of a battle fought in Heaven, between Michael and his Angels, and the Dragon and his Angels, and of the victory that Michael and his Angels, had over the Dragon and his Angels; and of the casting of the Dragon and his Angels out of Heaven; all which is true, and not at all to be denied.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What is meant by Heaven?  Min. 
By Heaven is meant, not the highest heaven, but the Church of Christ militant here on earth.   

ANSWER.  
Concerning this war in Heaven, you speak well enough. For in respect of the vision seen it was showed in that heaven or heavenly theatre where Saint John saw the representation of these things, as I think need not be denied; and not in heaven itself: For in heaven properly taken there is no fight, the warfare of those who inhabit there is quite ended, they are all triumphant, they rest in joyful peace. But in respect of the accomplishment, there is cause enough to grant that we are pointed either to the Church of God (which is a kind of heaven upon earth) or else to that heaven whither the woman's Child was taken up, after his mother had brought him forth: for the Dragon (in the Imperial Dragons, or heathen persecuting Emperors) reigned over the Church till then, I mean till Constantine subdued them; who hanged up on high over the gates of his Palace, a Table wherein was painted a Dragon, which lay thrust through with a dart, under his own and his subjects feet.   

DIALOGUE.  Min. 
By Michael and his Angels are meant Christ and his true followers, especially the faithful Preachers of the Gospel.   

ANSWER.  
This is also reasonably well expounded; but not full enough: For the accomplishment itself showeth, that Constantine is chief to be comprehended amongst those of Michael's Angels, who fought with the Dragon and his Angels; as (if I were to write purposely of these things) I could show at large.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What is meant by the Dragon and his Angels?  Min. 
By the Dragon and his Angels are meant the Devil, and the heathen persecuting Emperors, and the Popes.   

ANSWER.  
Not the Pope's: for this was a vision of what was done before their times. The vision which belongs to them, is in the next chapter: and in the account of times came not in thus soon. In the rest you speak right enough: For though that old Serpent which is called the Devil and Satan, be the Dragon primarily; yet nevertheless the instruments of his fury are secondarily termed Dragons too, as well as he: for which we may see the Scriptures, in Jer. 51.34. Ezek. 29.3. Psal. 74.13,14. Esa. 27.1. and chap. 51.9.  
And so also for his Angels, not only the infernal Hags of Hell are meant, but even the wicked men who were of his side, and helped to fight against the truth: for which we may likewise see the Scriptures, in Pro. 17.11. Revel. 2.10. and chap. 9.14.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What is meant by the Battle?  Min. 
By the battle is meant persecutions raised by the heathen persecuting Emperors, and the Popes, and the popish Princes, against the Christian Religion and the professors thereof.   

ANSWER.  
You extend again the Vision too fare, in bringing it down so low as the Popes and popish Princes: For it is a Prophecy of a war begun and finished before the Dragon went forth to make war with the remnant of the woman's seed; which war was indeed in the days of Antichrist, and is found to have relation first of all to those cruel wars of the Beast against the Albigenses and Waldenses, together with all such as were (if any were) called by other name professing the true worship of Christ, and hath hitherto continued still against the Saints, both in Martyrdoms, Inquisitions, Massacres, and the like: but the horns of the beast falling from him by degrees, shall at the last give an end to this war; and being become partners with the Saints (as many of them already are) shall turn their forces against the Beast, as in the 17. Chapter may be seen. And for your better instruction, you may see it in the end of the 12. Chapter, how that S. John saith, he saw the Dragon standing upon the Seashore, or upon the sand of the Sea; which was not only a good while after the Battle that he had with Michael, but was also for the raising up of the Beast to do that which you here mention to be done by the Popes and Popish Princes.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What is meant by the victory that Michael and his Angels bad over the Dragon and his Angels?  Min. 
By the victory is meant the victories that Christ gave to Constantine the Christian Emperor; and that he hath, doth, and daily will give to Christian Princes fight his battle against Antichrist and his partakers, and to the faithful Preachers against false Teachers.   

ANSWER.  
Here still you fail, by carrying the accomplishment lower than the days of Constantine. The success of Christian Princes against Antichrist, and of faithful Preachers against false Teachers, belongs to other visions, and cannot be here intended, unless you had the faculty of making one thing serve for all purposes.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What is meant by the casting the Dragon and his Angels out of heaven?  Min. 
Thereby is meant the utter confusion and overthrow of Antichrist by the Spirit of Christ's mouth, that is, by Preaching of the Gospel, so as he shall be deprived of all dignity, and shall have no place in heaven, that is, in the Church of God, to domineer any more; as thanks be to God, the Archbishop of Canterbury is deprived of all dignity, and shall never have any place again in heaven, I mean in the Church of God, to domineer as he hath done.   

ANSWER.  
The further you go, the more wrong still in your interpretation. But was it so, that you could not have a fling at the Archbishop of Canterbury, except you strain a Prophecy? You had better sure have let him alone, then by a false gloss corrupt the text: for in this very passage you have done no less, as is more than manifest; nor do my former Answers but declare it.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why is this Prophecy appointed to be read on Michaelmas day?  Min. 
It is appointed to be read on Michaelmas day, of purpose to pervert the meaning of our Saviour Christ, by mis-applying to Michael and all Angels in the highest Heaven, the victory that Christ hath, and daily doth, and will (every day more and more) give to true Christians, that do follow him, fight his battle against Antichrist.   

ANSWER.  
Here is again another small dram of your little Charity: the accusation is the same with a former; and the exposition not agreeing with the scope of the Prophecy: For if you study the Revelation throughly, you will find this to be a vision of the Primitive times, and not to be extended so low as Antichrist, or to the success of sound Christians fight against him.  
Besides, as for the Church's meaning, you might have soberly judged this to be the meaning of the Church in ordering to have this Scripture read at the time appointed; That albeit Christ be figured and signified to us under the type of Michael; yet even the Angel Michael is understood to have appeared in the vision shown to S. John, with an host of other Angels fight against the Dragon and his Angels, representing thereby Christ with his heavenly Angels, and his servants on earth, to sight against the Devil with his Angels and wicked complices, and to prevail against them; as was historically fulfilled in the days of Constantine, who with his soldiers did undoubtedly fight under Christ's banner, and was encouraged thereunto by miracle, and thereby made General upon Earth of this holy warfare: for behold a bright Cross appeared in the Heavens about midday, with this inscription on it, 
* Vide lib. 1. de vita. Constant. cap. 22.  In hoc signo vinces, under this ensign thou shalt overcome: The truth of which miracle was confirmed to Eusebius by Oath, even from Constantine himself. And at the sight of this, Constantine being admonished of the Christian Religion, suffered himself to be taught in Christianity, and had the Banners of his Soldiers proportioned according to the fashion of the Cross, with two Greek letters (X and P) made upon them, which should stand to signify the name of Christ. After all which, when the war was ended (the divine providence thus ordering these occurrences, that thereby we might learn the accomplishment of this Prophecy) he took order that a table should be hanged up on high over the gates of his Palace, wherein a Dragon was painted, which lay thrust through with a Dart, under his own and his Subjects feet; as a little before I have already mentioned, and do now cite for my Authors, Eusebius, Socrates and Theodoret. Euseb. de vit. Const. lib. 3. cap. Socrat. lib. 1. c. 6. Theod. lib. 1. cap. 15. In every of which places of the said authors, the story mentioned stands recorded.  
AND thus hitherto I have followed you step by step, and balked nothing which your pretions' Dialogue hath afforded. You make a sally next against new Orders, which because they are upon their trial, I pass them over: hearty wishing, that under the fear of hatching Popery, we may be better settled then to part with piety. For whilst these things have been in question, the ruder sort are every day more and more irreverent. But the God of Heaven put it into the hearts of the high Court of Parliament to look into it, and to make the whole kingdom know that the Lord is King both of Heaven and Earth, and therefore more to be honoured then any King, nay then all Kings else: 
* Psal. 99.1.  The Lord is King (saith David) be the people never so unpatient: he sitteth between the Cherubins, be the Earth never so unquiet. 
a Ps 96 3,4,5,6,7,8,9.  Declare his honour unto the heathen: and his wonders unto all the people. For the Lord is great, and cannot worthily be praised: he is more to be feared then all Gods. As for the Gods of the heathen they are but Idols: but it is the Lord that made the Heavens. Glory and worship are before: power and honour are in his Sanctuary. Ascribe unto the Lord (oh ye kindred of the people) ascribe unto the Lord worship and power. Ascribe unto the Lord the honour due unto his name: bring presents and come into his Courts. O worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness: let all the Earth stand in awe of him. 
b Ps. 122.1.  I was glad when they said unto me, let us go into the house of the Lord. 
c Ps. 93.6.  Thy testimonies, O Lord, are sure: Holiness becometh thine house forever. 
d Psal 95 6.  O come, let us worship, and fall down, and kneel before the Lord our Maker. 
e Ps 86.8,9,10.  Among the Gods there is none like unto thee (O Lord) there is none that can do as thou dost. All nations that thou hast made shall come and worship thee, O Lord: and shall glorify thy name. For thou art great and dost wondrous things: thou art God alone. 
f Psal 5.7.  I will come into thy house, in the multitudes of thy mercy: and in thy fear will I worship towards the Temple of thy holiness. 
g Ps 63,2,3,4,5,6.  My Soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh also longeth after thee: in a barren and dry land where no water is, Thus have I looked for thee in holiness: that I might behold thy power and glory. For thy loving kindness is better than the life itself: my lips shall praise thee. As long as I live will I magnify thee on this manner: and lift up my hands in thy name. My Soul shall be satisfied, even as it were with marrow and fatness: when my mouth praiseth thee with joyful lips. 
h Ps 74.2,3,4,5,6,7.  O think upon thy Congregation: whom thou hast purchased and redeemed of old. Think upon the tribe of thine inheritance: and mount Zion wherein thou hast dwelled. Lift up thy feet, that thou mayst utterly destroy every enemy: which hath done evil in thy Sanctuary. Thine adversaries roar in the midst of thy Congregations; and set up their Banners for tokens. He that hewed timber afore out of the thick trees: was known to bring it to an excellent work. But now they break down all the carved work thereof: with axes and hammers. All which being spoken by a man after Gods own heart, is of current weight, and without exception. I may therefore turn again now to follow what is next in the Dialogue. And that which is next, is about the order prescribed by the Church in the Visitation of the sick: in which because you have some exceptions, the same with what we have heard from you already, in certain other passages, shall not here be again repeated.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
What form of Prayer doth the Service-book prescribe for sick persons?  Min. 
It prescribeth no form to be used in the Church,  Gent. 
What then?  Min. 
The Minister must go to their houses and salute them, as the Masse-Priest doth, saying, Peace be to this house, and to all that dwell in it; and when he is come where the sick person is, he must kneel, kc.   

ANSWER.  
And why (I pray) do you quarrel with this? Christ taught his Disciples so to salute the house into which they entered, Math: 10.12,13. and Luk. 10.5,6,7. And may not the Ministers since those times do the like, but be blamed for their labours? You fight with your own shadow, and quarrel without a cause: as is most apparent. There be six duties of charity, of which our Saviour will speak at the latter day; and to come and visit the sick is one of them, Math. 25.35,36. Nor is it in the Minister, but even a work also of his office: And therefore, being sent for, he cometh to pray with, instruct, comfort, and strengthen the sick party. For Is any man sick among you, let him call for the Elders of the Church, and let them pray over him Jam. 5.14. This order than is not without a scripture rule.  
But you have a further quarrel; and that's against our absolving the sick person from all his sins, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Why man, if it be done in the name of the blessed Trinity, it is not by any primary or original power that is in ourselves. For the Bishops and Pastors of the Church do not forgive sin by any absolute power of their own (for so only Christ their Master forgiveth sins) but ministerially, as the servants of Christ, and stewards, to whose fidelity their Lord and Master hath committed his Keys. If you ask me how Christ came by this power, seeing none can forgive sins but God, I answer, first that he had it by Commission from God; it was a power given him by his Father: and so we read, in Joh. 20.21. Secondly, he had it through the Union of the Godhead and Manhood into one person: For though it be true, that as he was God he had it of himself; yet not so, as he was Man: For as he was Man he had it by virtue of the Union from God. Now this he transfers further: Peter had a promise that the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven should be given; but this promise was not accomplished until afterwards, not until the day of Christ's Resurrection: whereupon we read, in as plain words as may be, That the same day at night, which was the first day of the week, and when the doors were shut where the Disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and said unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shown unto them his hands and his sides▪ Then were the Disciples glad when they had seen the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: As my Father sent me, so send I you. And when he had said that, he breathed on them, and said unto them, receive the holy Ghost. Whosoevers sins ye remit, they are remetted unto them: and whosoevers s●nnes ye retain, they are retained. Joh. 20.19,20,21,22,23.  
When this promise was made to Peter, although spoken to him in particular, yet not with an intent to invest him solely in the thing promised, as even the sequel and accomplishment thereof fully proveth. Howbeit, because he by his Confession gave answer for the rest, and was the speaker for them, when Christ said, But whom say ye that I am? therefore doth Christ direct his speech to him again in particular; who as he spoke for them all, so he is promised the Keys in the behalf of them all; See Mat. 16.15,16,17.18,19.  
This then showeth, that S Peter was endued with no more power than the rest of the Apostles; and therefore the Pope can claim no more than another Bishop: and in that regard our Ordination is lawful and right, valid and firm, although we go not over to Rome to fetch it: For so long as we have Bishops of our own, consecrated and installed into their Office, as Bishops always have been, there is no doubt or scruple to be made. Knowing therefore that when we take Ordination we also receive an holy and Ghostly authorioy, not only in having the word of Reconciliation, and dispensation of the Sacraments committed unto us, but also of binding and losing, or of remitting and retaining sins; we may not suffer our Church to be defamed, nor the Ministers thereof to be accounted Antichristian. For hath our Saviour said, Whose sins ye remit, they are remitted; and whose sins ye retain, they are retained: and shall any mortal man deny it? His words are not, Whose sins ye signify to be remitted, but Whose sins ye remit; which the Author of the Practice of Piety (no Papist sure) hath well observed. Nor is the same but granted by a distinction put between declare and pronounce: For, to declare is chief to show God's goodness towards penitent sinners, which every good Christian may do, when he sees occasion, for the comfort of his brother according to the truth of God's gracious promises: but to pronounce, is to give sentence as a Judge, in the name of him who hath the authority primarily in himself.  
You speak of the key of Knowledge, and explain it well enough; but that is not the sole key of binding and losing, and therefore not a thing which comes fully home to the purpose. Whensoever therefore any sick person, or burdened sinner shall unbosom himself to one of God's ministers, and shall hear him pronounce thus, By the authority which Christ hath committed to me, I do absolve thee from all thy sins, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost; then may the said Sinner rest assured that his sins are forgiven him, and that God doth ratify in Heaven what his Priest pronounceth on Earth. The like may be said of one who for the present sees not sufficiently into himself, but by the striking of him with the terrors of the Law is brought to the full sight of his wretchedness, and by the glad tidings of the Gospel is raised up again, and kept from desperation, namely, That then God doth fully speak peace unto his soul, when by the like Deputy he shall hear the like sentence of absolution.  
Protestants (saith Bishop 
* Protest. Appeal p. 254.  Morton) do greatly approve the use of private and voluntary confession, when a man either suspecteth the unlawfulness of any action, or else when he groaneth under the sensible guilt of a troubled soul, and shall desire the way of curing his disease, by the comfortable pronunciation of God's pardon from the mouth of him who hath the commission thereof from God. And in another place, 
Idem, in his Appeal, p. 270.  The power of Absolution (saith he) whether it he general or particular, whether in public or in private, it is professed in our Church: where both in henpublike Service is proclaimed Pardon and Absolution upon all Penitents, and a private applying of Absolution unto particular Penitents by the office of the Minister; and greater power than this no man hath received from God: thus he. Bishop Usher likewise against a Jesuits Challenge, at the 109 page saith, He hath done us open wrong in charging us to deny, that Priests have power to forgive sins. And he gives a reason irrefragable, as another great Scholar terms it, because he mentions hereupon, that The formal words which our Church requireth to eused in the Ordination of a Mivister, are these; Whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou distretaine, they are retained. The execution of which authority accordingly is put in practice in the Visitation of the Sick. And shall I further tell you, you shall find it noted in the Practice of Piety, that Doctor Holland absolved Doctor Rainolds at his death; who not being able to speak, kissed the hand wherewith he was absolved. And in the Conference at Hampton Court, the said particular Absolution in the common-prayer-book being read, His 
* King James of blessed memory.  Majesty, who was indeed a second Solomon) exceedingly well approved it, adding that it was Apostolical, and a very good ordinance, in that it was given in the name of Christ, to one that desired it, and upon the clearing of his conscience.  
Hath then Almighty God given such power unto Men, as not only to publish the conditions of Peace and Reconciliation to the sons of Men, viz. Credenti remittentur peccata, if they believe they shall receive Remiffion; but also to apply the comfortable assurance of Remission to this and that man in particular, and upon the sight and approbation of Penitency to say, I absolve thee? Or is this doctrine of Confession and Absolution agreeable to the Scriptures, and practise of the Church as well present as primitive? Then (that I may speak it in the words of our 
* ●…. Boyse, pag. 523. impres. 1629.  English Postiller,) albeit some scribbling Scribe pen an invective pamphlet against a discreet Pastor executing this office, or some self-conceited Pharisee tell the people, this man blasphemeth; he may notwithstanding (upon good information of faith and repentance) say to the sick sinner in his bed, Thy sins are forgiven thee; and by Christ's authority committed unto him, I absolve thee: greater power than which no man ever received.  
Thus t●en, clavae non errante, if the Minister fail not in the key of knowledge, that is, in discerning and rightly judging of the penitential sorrow, and contrition of the peccant, his key of Power and Authority delegate is found effectually operative, and hath in it (as one truly speaketh) 
M Bedford, Treat. os the Sacr. p. 60.  the stamp of God for the quiet and content of the troubled conscience. Qui vos audit, 〈◊〉 audit, he that heareth you, heareth me. Try this (saith another) 
See the Pract. of Pity.  and tell me whether thou shalt not find more ease in thy conscience then can be expressed. Adding moreover, that did profane men consider the dignity of this Divine Calling, they would the more honour the Calling, and reverence the Persons. For as God hath reconciled the world to himself by Jesus Christ, so hath he given unto us the Ministry of this reconciliation, as saith the Apostle in 2 Cor. 5.18.  
Verily the difference between the Papists and us in this point is very great: They tie the keys to the Pope's girdle, so as whoso hath them, hath them not but from him. He grants Absolutions sealed with Lead, in form of a Judicial sentence of a Court, although he know not how the party that he means to absolve stands affected, or desires an Absolution. Some have had Absolutions sent them from Rome for their moneys: others have caused them to come by Bills of Exchange. The Pope, under pretence of this power, takes upon him to untie the knot of fidelity which Subjects own to their natural Prince: he dischargeth men of their lawful oaths, and children of the obedience which they own to their Parents. A man they say, may be absolved against his will; no matter therefore for conditions requisite, or qualifications of Faith and Repentance in the penitent. Their Bishops and Priests (they say) forgive sins by the very word of Absolution, or by the bare pronouncing of the words and syllables; by a true and physical efficiency, reaching to the very production of grace, as Suarez speaketh; or to the dissolution and destruction, or extinguishing of Sin, as Bellarmine affirmeth. They fail also whilst they hold, that at the will and pleasure of every Priest exercising the Keys on earth, men are bound and loosed in heaven, without any proviso at all, of Clavae non errante. And Bellarmine would feign make the world believe, that the Keys remain in our Saviour Christ's hand only at the vacancy of the Popedom. Absolution is among them made a true and a right Sacrament: They tie all upon pain of damnation to come to shrift, thrusting this their auricular confession upon the souls of Christians as an expiatory Sacrifice, and a meritorious satisfaction for sin: They leave none to liberty, either to come or not to come, to confess or not to confess; but cry out, that all who will be saved must necessarily go on in this way, though he feels no distress; but having throughly searched himself, hath been truly sorrowful already, and received secret comfort from above. Nor are they but tied to enumerate all their sins, which is impossible.  
Hugo, in his book of the Church's power to bind and lose, speakesfully thus: I dare boldly say (quoth he) if before the Priest's absolution any man do come to the Communion of the Body and Blood of the Lord, that he doth assuredly eat and drink his own damnation, although be repent him never so much, and doth never so greatly lament his offences. But yet though Hugo were thus bold, Saint Paul hath said, Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of this Bread, and drink of this Cup. Hugo might have seen it, and not have made all eases alike: notwithstanding which peremptory assertion of his, the Church of Rome left the matter still at liberty; yea, though Peter Lombard were mightily for it. For Gratian, who lived and flourished at the same time with Lombard, determineth nothing definitively, but showing sentences for either side (both that we must confess our sins to the Priest, and not confess them) doth leave it indifferently unto the Readers judgement. After whom followed Lotharius Levita, a Doctor of Paris, the scholar and earnest follower of Peter Lombard; who being once made Bishop of Rome, and named Innocent the third, made a law for it in the Council of Literan, which Gregory the ninth reciteth in his Decretal of Penance and Remission, the fift book, and twelfth Chapter, to this effect; Let every person of either sex, after they are come to the years of discretion, faithfully confess alone, at lest 
* Semel in animo, in the Latin, for semel in anno.  once in a year their sins unto their own proper Priest; and do their endeavour with their own strength to do the penance that is enjoined them; receiving reverently at Easter, at the least the Sacrament of the Eucharist, unless peradventure by the council of their own Priest, for some reasonable cause, they think it good for a time to abstain from receiving it. Otherwise in this life let them be prohibited to enter into the Church; and when they are dead, to be buried in Christian burial. This is that new Law which in their little pretty Council of Trent was further enlarged, and more errors added to their abused practice of Absolution. But let not the Antichristian abuse of this divine Ordinance abolish the lawful use thereof betwixt good Christians and their Pastors, when need and occasion is to have it used. And so I leave this point, and come next to give answer unto something else.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why will they not suffer the Genealogy of Christ to be read to the people?  Min. 
They have no warrant for it from God, but from the Pope, who saith that ignorance is the Mother of devotion: therefore the Genealogy of Christ is forbidden to be read, of purpose to keep the people in blindness, not able to see the truth of God, in fulfilling his promise to Abraham and to David, that Christ should come of them, and of their seed; nor to see that Christ came not only of Abraham and of David, who were Jew's, but also of Rahab and of Ruth, who were Gentiles; and that therefore Christ is not a Saviour of the Jews only, but also of us Gentiles.   

ANSWER.  
Your judgement is too rash to be credited; too rash, good man, I dare assure you. If you had said that the Genealogies were less edifying then other scripture, and therefore omitted, your reason had been of more authority and better agreeing to what is mentioned in the order before the Calendar. For tell me (I beseech you) whether those Instructions and Lessons which you gather from hence, are manifest upon the bare reading? and if not (as for certain they be not) then why should you dare to accuse the Church of such a wicked purpose as to intent the keeping of the people in blindness?   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why is the Book of Canticles forbidden to be read?  Min. 
It is also forbidden of purpose to keep the people in blindness not able to see the ardent love and affection of Christ towards them, lest thereby they should be stirred up to love Christ, and to be zealous of his glory, and to abhor the Pope and his Antichristian Religion.   

ANSWER.  
An heap of slanders still: Here you take the like liberty to judge that you did before: a thing nothing strange to men of your Sect; I should else have wondered, that you could not have thought the reading of this book to be omited for some other reason, which (if need were) 'tis like enough I could lay before you. But I pass it over, and shall only tell you, that Preaching may explain, what reading cannot: And therefore till you hear Ministers forbidden to open in their Sermons either this book or the other Scriptures that you mention, you may (right worthy Sir) sit worshipfully down and hold your peace.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why are the books of Kings and of Chronicles forbidden?  Min. 
Because they do show that godly Kings did ever love Gods true Prophets, and did hearken unto them, and were zealous in maintaing the true Religion, and in suppressing Idolatry.   

ANSWER.  
You should speak the truth, and shame the Devil. At the entrance of these accusations although I passed it by, because I might here declare it) you said that both the Books of the Kings, except the eight first Chapters of the first Book, were forbidden: but look again, and you will find it otherwise. If your eyes be dim, you may use your Spectacles: for the truth is, that both the books are appointed to be read throughout, excepting those eight Chapters which you mention: and not vice versa; for that's false. And because the Books of the Chronicles do relate the same stories which are written in the Books of the Kings, it is sufficient to appoint the reading of the one, although the other be omitted.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
Why is the Book of the Revelation forbidden?   

ANSWER.  
You grant this book also to be forbidden: and yet you know that we have Lessons taken out of the Revelations, and read upon Saint John's day, as also upon the day of All-Saints: besides Epistles taken from thence, and appointed to be read on Trinity Sunday, Michaelmas day, and Innocents' day. Know all men therefore by these presents that you plainly show yourself no better than a false accuser.  
In the next place you fall foul upon Bishops, and besprinkle them with the dirt which your Spleen hath raised: only you do a little qualify your distaste towards them that suffered Martyrdom in the days of Queen Mary; but like not their love to the Book of Common Prayer: thinking yourself to be more illuminated than were they, notwithstanding they laid down their lives in defence of the truth, in denying the Pope's usurped supremacy, and for not granting the Bread and Wine in the Lord Supper to be the Body and Blood of Christ. All the rest since have been odious unto you, their remembrance loathsome, and judged to be men destitute of the true fear of God. Their Prelacy dislikes you, and your language against them is just as was the language of Corath, Dathan and Abiram in the days of old, against Moses and Aaron. 
Num. 16.3.  Diotrephes was one also who would not receive the Apostles, but prated against them with malicious words, as Saint John hath told us: 
Epist. 3. v. 9, 10.  and because this pert man that thus prated against them, could not be above them, he slights them and labours for preeminence. But what say the Scriptures? they give us notice of some, who in the latter days should perish in the gainsaying of Corah, as well as of some who should be led with the error of Balaam for reward. 
See S. Judes' Epist. vers. 11.  Look well about you, and take heed how you strike; an Angel else may chance to stand against you, whilst you ride on the beast, and be as loath to lose the rewards of your good Masters and Dames, as was Balaam to lose the rewards of the King of Moab. For the Pope may be Antichrist, though Bishops be upheld: they were never limbs of that man of Sin, as Bishops, but as Popish; whilst they swore subjection unto him, whilst they defended him, whilst they worshipped him above all that is called God, and extorted this homage from others: But shall they therefore which defy him, resist, trample upon him, spend their lives and labours in opposing of him, be necessarily still in the same condition, because they are Bishops? a foolish argument, and he were a senseless man that should subscribe it. But shall I tell you? there were many Kings and Princes that gave their strength and power to the Beast, but are now revolted from him: are they not therefore Kings and Princes still? Yes sure: their calling is not lost, they are Kings and Princes still, although not Antichristian Kings and Princes. England was once termed the Pope's Ass, but hath long since shaked off that yoke and abolished the Pope's tyranny, is it not therefore England still? Or to speak of what was late, The Princes, Peers and Magistrates of England in Queen Mary's days were shoulders and arms of Antichrist; their calling is still the same, and must still be retained, notwithstanding than they went the wrong way in it. The like is to be said of Bishops in regard of their order, which in itself is as firm, strong, and sound as ever; notwithstanding what you, or any man else, may urge to the contrary. If you were not a man of faction, but would deal fairly in this business, you should not plead for parity, or go about to destroy the government of God's Church by Bishops; but labour to retain the Primitive form: which consistteth, not in the abolishing of Bishops, and striving to make all Pastors equal; but in the restoring of Presbyteries, by joining with the Bishops deserving, honest, and able 
* See for this Mr. Thorndikes book of the primitive Government of Churches.  Presbyters; not Lay-elders, but learned Ministers.  
In a word, there is one thing more, which before I go further must be rememhred. For you tell us, that in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth's reign, when she began to be sickly, and not like to live long, than Doctor Bancroft Lord Bishop of London, knowing that King James was to succeed her, and fearing that his Majesty would reform things amiss in the public worship and service of God, and in the Government of the Church, did Licence a Book written by a Jesuit that he kept in his house, wherein it was written, that it was in the Pope's power, as a gift appropriate to Saint Peter's chair, to depose the Kings of England, and to give authority to the People to elect, choose, and set up another.  
Whereto I answer, that in this you do but cast dirt in the face of the dead: For that which you here mention is but what was objected in the Conference at Hampton Court by Doctor Reynolds, and openly proved then (in presence of his Majesty which you speak of) to be but a false aspersion by which the Bishop was injured and slandered. Wherefore you do ill to revive it now for the incensing of the people to the more malice, who are already too eager to inveigh against Bishops. For I verily think. that never since the times of Christ and his Apostles, were Bishops in such hatred, nor had in such contempt as now. I wonder that they go not about likewise to cry down a standing Ministry: for personal offenders may as well countenance the abolishing of the one, as of the other: And indeed it is in a manner come even to that too, amongst some furious and fanaticke spitits. But the God of Heaven put a right end to these busy stirs, lest all at the last be brought to ruin. Let the fierceness of those Opposites who cry Down with them, down with them, even to the ground, turn to thy praise o blessed Lord: yea, the fierceness of them who are thus furious, do thou restrain; and bring honour to thy name out of this dishonour, and good to thy Church out of this evil: It is thine own cause, o God; arise therefore and defend it, in spite of all that shall oppose it.  
And thus I am come almost to the end of your doughty Dialogue; a little more will bring me to it.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
There was a little Book written of late, and dedicated to the Mouse of Parliament, that had most of these things in it, that you have spoken of, concerning the Service-booke and the Bishops.  Min. 
There was so, but the Author thereof is much grieved every time that he doth think upon it, because it was dispersed without his consent, and printed false, by putting in and leaving out of words; so as it was not fit to be presented to the House of Parliament.   

ANSWER.  
Great pity sure to see so worthy a work defaced, especially being intended for the view of the high Court of Parliament. But grieve not at it, though you sometimes chance to think upon it; for you make amends for all, in this most learned and through-paced Dialogue; which is instar omnium, and a great deal fit for the Parliament then that little Book you speak of. Aquila non capit Muscas; Parliaments meddle with great matters. Let little Books therefore go, and think yourself better with this great volume of almost twenty leaves in Quarto; which the Parliament (when it hath nothing else to do) will read and relish as well as it can. This is enough to comfort you; you may by no means desire more, except you had written to better purpose.   

DIALOGUE.  Gent. 
It made mention of Judgements, etc.   

ANSWER.  
Here you come in with a discourse, out of your little Book, of some fearful Judgements showed on Churches by Thunder and Lightning, in Service time; and you mention chief two; the one on the Parish Church of Whitcomb in Devonshire, upon the 21 day of October 1638. the other on the Parish Church of Anthony in Cornwell upon Whitsunday 1640. when the people were kneeling at the Communion: which fell upon those places to show that God is not pleased, but much offended with the public Worship and Service which is prescribed unto his holy Majesty in our Service-booke. Thus saith your Dialogue, pag. 32. 35. and 37.  
But what saith the Apostle? O how unsearchable are God's Judgements, and his ways past finding out! And verily, we thank God, our Service book is clearly proved to be of another nature, then to offend the diyine Majesty. But in this you speak against us just as did the Pagans sometimes against the Christians; who imputed all the calamities that befell them, to be in regard of the Christian religion: plagues, famine, fires, and whatsoever public calamity befell them, was for no other cause. This therefore made the poor Christians suffer the more persecutions, and come under the greater troubles, even to the shedding of their blood, with a purpose of destroying them quite, and rooting them out. Howbeit the God of Heaven did sometimes send them times of breathing, and at last stirred up a powerful patriot carefully to defend them: all which was showed in vision to Saint John, as we may read it in the 12 Chapter of the Revelation. And as for us, beside the whole Answer to your Dialogue, I have already (even in particular) shown you, how Litanies have prevailed with God in times of danger. And are these services now become odious to Heaven? not in themselves, but in those who do not use them as they ought: For God is the same always, from one Generation to another; he changeth not, but is the same for ever; and is well pleased to see us come into his Courts, and to do our devotions before him. But this is evermore the fashion of your Sect, to dive deeper into God's secrets than they who are wise unto sobriety dare determine.  
God bless the King, and direct aright the High Court of Parliament; and so guide and direct us all, that we may with a joint consent strive together truly to set forth his praise and glory. To which let all that love the Lord say evermore Amen, Amen.    


An addition in a word or two, to give satisfaction concerning the Surplice.  
THe Dialogue, I confess, meddles not at all with this: But because some scruple at it, without cause; I shall speak a word or two about it.  
The attire which the Minister of God is by order to use at times of Divine Service, is a long w●ite garment, which we commonly call a Surplice: to which Graduates have their hoods and such like other Ornaments added, according to their degrees in the University. The use whereof is not only appointed by Canon, but established by Act of Parliament: as may be seen in the Rubric entitled, The Order where Morning and Evening Prayer shall be used and said. Which Rubric is set before the beginning of Common Prayer: comprehending also the Ornaments or Robes of Bishops, as well as of other inferior Ministers. All which were likewise in u●e by Authority of Parliament, in the second year of the reign of King Edward the fixed, and by like authority continued amongst us, even ever since.  
The original of this white garment came not first from Popery, but was used in the Church of God long before. They do ill therefore who affright themselves at the fight thereof, and terrify others also with it, as if it were a Relic or R●g of Popery. Were it not better (saith worthy Hooker) 
Eccles Polit. pag. 61. lib. 5.  that the love which men bear to God should make the least things that are employed in his Service amiable, then that their over-scrupulous dislike of so mean a thing as a Vestment should from the very service of God withdraw their hearts and affections?  
Divine Religion, saith Saint Hierom, hath one kind of habit to Minister before the Lord; another, for ordinary uses belonging unto common life. This he said in his Comment upon the 44. chap. of Ezekiel, in regard of the ornaments which even the Priests under the Law were clothed with: Howbeit his words are extensive to Divine Religion in general: and therefore he chides with Pelagius when he taxed at large all neat apparel, as if he had meant something also against the white garment worn by persons Eccle siasticall, when they administer the usual Sacrifice: 
Hieron. advers. Pelag. lib. 8. c. 6.  For this he saith they did in a garment that was white. chrysostom also mentions the same, and calls it, A white shining garment; as may be seen in that which he speaketh to the Clergy men at Antioch: where he doth not accuse them because they wore it; but told them (as Hooker fitly noteth) that it was a matter of small commendation in itself, if they which wear it do nothing else but air the robes which their place requireth, Chrysost. ad popul. Antioch. tom. 5. Serm. 60.  
The Priest's garments under the Law, had (I grant) their mystical reference peculiar to those times: beside which they served likewise for comeliness, expressed in Exod. where it is said They were for glory and for beauty. Ex. 28.2. and are not therefore exempted from the choice of the Church of Christ, to select some special one or other out of the number of those holy garments, or to appoint some other to be worn for decency and order; according to that general Canon of the New Testament which the Apostle mentions, in the 1 Cor. 14.40. Nor is it but certain, that the Analogy of their Law is a rule to us: yea the equity and righteousness thereof binds us still; and even in this teacheth us, that God's Ministers, as well now as then, are not only to be differenced from the people, but even from themselves in respect of their attire at other times. For the more solemn the performance is of any public duty, the better it is imprinted in the regard and esteem of others. 
Eccl. Polit. p. 168. lib. 4.  " For we must not think but that there is some ground of reason even in nature; whereby it cometh to pass, that no Nation under heaven either doth or ever did suffer public actions which are of weight, whether they be Civil or Temporal, or else Spiritual and Sacred, to pass without some visible solemnity, as Hooker speaketh. Magistrates of note have their robes in highest Courts, and Judges at Law are gravely attired: And shall not Ministers officiate in comely garments?  
The Angels that appeared at our Saviors Resurrection were then employed in a part of their service; And were they not clothed in white? a fitting Pattern for God's Ministers, whom the Scripture sometimes termeth Angels, Malach. 3.1. and Revel. 1.20.  
It is written also in the Revelation, 
Revel. 15 6.  that the Seven Angels came out of the Temple, clothed in pure and white linen: a pattern again for God's Ministers, and more perspicuous, who as they are Angels in name, so may be like Angels in this, whilst they do service to their God in any Temple. And if (as one speaketh) 
Mr. Reeve in his Divinit. p. 103.  it be granted to the wife of the Lamb, that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white; for the fine linen is the righteousness of the Saints; why may it not (saith he) be granted to her more excellent Members to be so arrayed in presence of that Lamb, land in his public service, with material fine linen, clean and white, in signification of the righteousness of Saints, wherewithal they ought most eminently to be arrayed: for so the Psalmist mentions, in Psal. 132.9. Hereto again agrees our worthy Hooker, 
Eccl. Polit. lib. 5. pag. 61.  namely, That it suiteth so fitly with that lightsome affection of joy, wherein God delighteth when his Saints praise him; and so lively resembleth the glory of the Saints in Heaven, together with the beauty wherein Angels have appeared unto Men, that they which are to appear for men in presence of God as Angels, if they were lest unto their own choice and would choose any, could not easily devise a garment of more decency for such a service. 
Psal. 149.2. Rev. 15.6. Mar. 16 5.   
Thus than we see what little cause there is for any one to scruple, eryout, or rail against the solemn wearing of this Vestment. For mine own part, I shall better esteem it then ever yet: yea, though it should chance to be quite put down, my thoughts will be ever the same, in the mean time accounting them no other than turbulent troublers of the Churches quiet, who shall still be obstinate, and upon no terms receive satisfaction, but perversely provide to advance puritanical humours; which being once predominant, are like a naked sword, sharp, and unsheathed in a mad man's hands. But from such as these, Good Lord deliver us.   

A further addition concerning a place in the XII. Chapter of Toby, at the IX. verse, where it is written that Alms do save from death, and purge away all sin.  
SOme say it is an Hyperbole, and aught so be taken, lest otherwise we detract from the Blood of Christ, to whom it belongeth to free from Sin and Death.  
Others answer thus, that we must have recourse to the rule, because the doctrine of the Law without Christ profiteth nothing. Placent igitur Eleemosynae Deo, quae sequuntur reconciliationem seu justificationem, non quae praecedunt; that is, Alms please God which follow Reconciliation or Justification, not which go before it: This thus in the book of the Concord of the Prince Electours in Germany, and of those Divines which embraced the Augustane Confession. Wherein is further added, that Alms are the exercises of faith, which receives Remission of sins, which overcometh Death, whilst it exerciseth itself more and more, and in those exercises gains forces. There it is also written, that the whole speech of Toby being looked into, showeth that Faith is required to go before Alms. All the days of thy life have God in thy mind. And again, Always bless God, and desire of him that be would direct thy ways. Now this is properly of such a ones Faith, of which we speak, which perceiveth that it hath God appeased by reason of his mercy, and is willing to be justified of God, sanctified, and ruled by him. Thus fare out of that book, in the answer to the Papists, who cite certain places against us to prove that Faith doth not justify, and that we deserve Remission of sins and grace by our Works.  
Doctor Fulke, against the Rhemish Testament, denieth these words to be in the Greek text of Toby. But there is a place much like it, in Dan. 4 24. See also Prov. 15.27. Prov. 16.6. Luk. 11.41. and then hear an answer out of Bishop Morton, in his Protestant appeal, lib. 3. cap. 9 §. 1.  
First (saith he) in these places which have been objected, there is only mention made of Alms: can the Romanists say that Alms alone have this force of redeeming sin? If they should, then might they readily be confuted by their own Jesuit Maldonate, showing from St. Austin, that no man will say that giving of Alms can avail for purgation of sin, without faith in him (Christ) who is the author of salvation. And this doctrine the Protestants (they know) do not mislike.  
Secondly, the question is, How then can Alms be said to purge sin? Whereunto their foresaid Jesuit answereth, that it is impossible for Alms to cleanse the soul from sin, but to dispose it. Which exposition is that which we may easily admit in his true sense: for God disposeth man unto faith and charity, and then is man disposed and qualified to receive Remission; as in the margin he noteth.  
Thirdly, their Bishop Jansenius and Cardinal Bellarmine examining the same text, report the excellent judgement of Basil, who taught, that Alms of themselves cannot expiate sin; but the primordial cause is the mercy of God, wberehy men have Redemption in all other actions.  
Well then, without any further searching into Authors, thus I conclude, that Alms are the fruits and exercises of faith, and well pleasing unto God, Heb. 13.16. And for any one to make an outward show of Religion, and to talk much of Faith, but practise no deeds of Charity, is to be like a sounding Brass and tinkling Cymbal, and to be dead still in sins and trespasses, not bringing forth fruits meet for Repentance. 
1 Cor. 13. Mat. 3.8. Psal, 1. v. 1, 2, 3.  Blessed (therefore) is the man that hath not walked in the council of the ungodly, nor stand in the way of sinners; and hath not sit in the seat of the scornful. But his delight is in the Law of the Lord: and is his Law doth he exercise himself day and night. For he shall be like a tree planted by the water's side, which will bring forth her fruit in due season. In a word, This is a true saying, and these things I will thou shouldest affirm, that they which have believed God, might be careful to show forth good works, Tit. 3.8. And then at the 14 verse, Let ours also learn to show forth good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.  
Soli Deo gloria.   

A further and final Addition concerning Episcopacy, to prove that it is of Divine right, because instituted by Christ and his Apostles, which this Dialogue-writer granteth, not to be till 334. years after Christ; together with a Corollary concerning a new Edition of the said writers Book.  
THe beginning of Imparity among the Ministers of the New Testament, was first laid by our Saviour Christ: and upon his ground, as Churches were planted, the Apostles raised the fabric of that government which in all parts of the Church they left established, before such time as they left the world. Only Diotrephes maliciously prated against them, and scorned to acknowledge the transcendent power of their Apostolical jurisdiction. Whereupon we read in the third Epistle which was written by S. john, that when the said Apostle wrote unto the Church, this great Stickler proudly stood out against him. For I wrote unto the Church (saith he) but Diotrephes which loveth to have the pre-eminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, I will call to your remembrance his deeas which he doth, prattling against us with malicious words; and not therewith content, neither he himself receiveth the Brethren, but forbiddeth them that would, and thrusteth them out of the Church.  
But Diotrephes might have seen a manifest imparity in our Saviour's own choice, even at the first, when he chose twelve Apostles, and made them more eminent than his other Disciples: for if the Seventy and the Twelve had been in all things equal, Christ had surely mentioned more Thrones than twelve, when he said; You that have followed me in the Regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the Throne of his glory, shall sit upon twelve Thrones, judging the twelve Tribes of Israel, Mat. 19.28.  
It is true indeed, that even those 70. were Ministers of the Gospel; but those Twelve were as it were the patriarchs of the Church, and noted still by an Article of eminence (as one worthily;) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is, the Twelve: for thus in Scripture we find them mentioned. These therefore were Stars (without doubt) of the greatest magnitude: and in that regard, as when the vision concerned the seven Churches of Asia in particular, it deciphers out the Angels thereof by Seven Stars, to note out the Governors or Bishops there, as shall be afterwards showed: So, when it concerns the Church in general, the glorious woman is brought forth with a Crown of twelve Stars upon her head, in honour of the twelve Apostles, Rev. 12.1  
It is recorded likewise in the first Chapter of the Acts, that when a place was void among the Twelve, by reason of the transgression of the traitor Judas, another is elected by the casting of a Lot, to succeed him in his charge, which is in express words said tobe a Bishopric, as at the 20 verse. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: that is, And his Bishopric let another take. Now the one of those who were nominated or presented hereunto that the choice might be made, was joseph, called Barsabas, whose Surname was justus: and he (as Dorothcus, in his Synopsis, mentions) was one of the seventy Disciples.  
Besides, this is also true, that other of the Ministry had the holy Ghost; but these were so eminent, as that they gave it. The proof is plain in Philip the Evangelist, who (as the said Author saith) was one likewise of the seventy: for though he preached, wrought miracles (according to the extraordinary gifts of those times) converted and baptised the Samaritans; yet nevertheless till Peter and john came down and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they received not the holy Ghost, as is expressly written in the 8. Chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, at the 14, 15, 16 and 17 verses.  
But proceed we further: the Apostles are still careful to do the work for which they are sent, they plant therefore Mother-Churches in Mother-Cities, they ordain them Presbyters, and so long as they themselves take the chief care of those Churches, they have no other Bishops to govern them, no otherwise then in common: for even the whole company were invested with a kind of oversight in the Apostles absence, whilst things were in fieri, though afterwards, when they were in facto, such as these were rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; as is plain enough, and needs no question: but in the mean while for this cause it was, that the name as yet was promiscuously given to the whole Bench of Presbyters, where the Apostles still were head, and had set up none in particular above the rest: An example whereof is in that of S. Paul to the Philippians, chap. 1. vers. 1. and in some place also, where a particular Bishop was appointed, the name for a while is still in common, as we see in the 1 Tim. 3.1. and in Titus chap. 1. v. 7.  
But it is not the name that we strive for; the thing is that which makes the difference: for though the name of Bishop was not suddenly appropriated to one more than another; yet the thing itself was: insomuch that the Bishopric where the Apostles had ordained Presbyters, was still to them in chief, until they began to set up, were out, or otherwise to withdraw upon occasion of planting in some other parts of the world: which when they did, both the name and office were then more nearly connected and distinct: the office fully, and the name as fully too, even quickly after. And (without question) this not well observed, makes some talk strangely, and bestir them madly for a Parity; urging upon us Scripture to none or little purpose.  
The first that was settled, was james, Bishop of jerusalem, one of the Apostles, under whom & his Presbyters was the Church of jerusalem: his Deacon was S. Steven, as Ignatius Epist. ad Trall. mentions. This was his peculiar charge, and for this Church they first provided before their departure from it. And when sometimes after this, they have occasion to come up thither, James is mentioned as one settled there, Gal. 1.18. His name is put in the first place, because that was his peculiar charge, Gal. 2.9. which at verse 12.  more manifest; when S. Peter, by the direction of S. james, withdraws himself from eating with the Gentiles. We read also of S. Paul, how at his last journey to jerusalem, he went to James, where he and his Presbyters were assembled, and takes advice from him (because of his settled abode in that place) how he ought to behave himself towards those of the Circumcision which believed, Act. 21.19.  
Afterwards (although not presently) Timothy and Titus are made Bishops, the one of Ephesus, the other of Crete.  
And first for Timothy: he is commanded to charge the preachers of Ephesus, that they teach no other doctrine than was prescribed, 1. Tim. 1.3. Now if Timothy were but an equal Presbyter with the rest, who would not think how equally apt the rest would be to bid him keep within his own compass, and not to meddle with them? Nor do we but read again at the third Chapter, vers. 10. that he must examine the Deacons, and let them minister if they be found blameless. And in the next Chapter at the 12. verse, he is charged both to command and teach And in the Chapter after this, at the 17. verse, he must see that the painful Presbyters be respectively used, and liberally maintained. And at the 19 verse, he hath power to censure ill deserving Presbyters, but upon fair grounds: for he may not receive an accusation against a Presbyter, under two or three witnesses: and will any man think that this could be done without the power of a jurisdiction? Then, at the next verse, when he finds a Presbyter convicted by such testimony as aforesaid, he may, he must rebuke him before all; that others also may fear. This made that Father Epiphanius, haeres. 75. say, not only that the Divine speech of the Apostle teacheth who is a Bishop and who is a Presbyter, in saying to Timothy, Rebuke not an Elder: but also, How could a Bishop rebuke a Presbyter, if he had no power over a Presbyter. Then, at the next verse he is strictly charged to observe these things, without preferring one before another, and to do nothing partially. A plain proof again of his power and authority over the rest. And finally, in the verse after this, he is forbidden to lay hands suddenly upon any one, He had power therefore of the imposition of hands, and to ordain Presbyters: For the charge is particularly directed to him, and not to them; even as we shall see it afterwards in the Church of Crete, where the power of ordination is as peculiar to Titus, as here to Timothy; and in neither places committed to the Presbyters. This therefore made one say, that Their hands without His, will not serve; His without Theirs might. An Apostle did so to him, (meaning to Timothy;) and he a Bishop might do it to others: For the Apostle doth not say here, Lend thy hand to be laid on with others; but appropriates it as his own act, saying even to him in particular, Lay hands suddenly upon no man, neither partake of other mens sias. Be there then what Presbyters there will, although the Bishop (and so is the practice of our Church) may join their hands to his own; yet that they alone without him can make a man a lawful Minister, is utterly denied: for a mere Presbyter, or many Presbyters of themselves, did never ordain others into the holy Ministry. And Epiphanius gives the reason of it; For how can it be (saith he) that a Priest should create [qui potestatem imponendi manus non habet] who hath no power of the imposition of hands? Hierome himself could say, Excepta ordinatione: who being no fast friend to Bishops, may be the better heard without suspicion. Quid enim facit Episcopus, excepta ordinatione, quod Presbyter non facit? For what doth a Bishop, except ordination, which a Presbyter also doth not? they be his own words in an Epistle written to Evagrius. And in the days of Athanasius, when that worthy Hosius was also famous, there was one Colluthus (a certain Priest of Alexandria) who took upon him to ordain Presbyters: but the Church in a general Council, convented him, and pronounced against his ordination, that it was no other than a mere Nullity. Quo pacto igitur Presbyter Ischyras, aut quo tandem authore constitutus? nunquid scilicet a Collutho? saith Athanasius in his second Apology, Ischyras was no Priest, because ordained by Colluthus. He is therefore not only opposed whilst he had the holy cup in his hand; but even devested afterwards of his pretended orders, and with all the rest which Colluthus undertook to ma●e, put amongst the Laics, ranked in their order, and under their name admitted to the holy Supper.  
But some (perhaps) will say, that Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13.3. received imposition of hands by the Presbyters of Antioch; and therefore mere Presbyters may ordain. No sure, never a jot the more for this. Imposition of hands was for more causes than one: both Paul and Barnabas were in the Ministry before this; and therefore by that which was now done, they received not their consecration into holy orders. It may rather be said, that Paul had his ordination from Ananias, a certain Disciple of Damascus; because he (before this) came and laid his hands upon him, as we read in Act. 9.17. But neither was this to ordain him into holy orders, in regard that his calling was immediate; and therefore saith he to those of Galatia, that he was an Apostle not of men, neither by man, but by jesus Christ, & God the Father, Gal. 1.1. And to the Corinthians, That he was not inferior to the very chief Apostles; as he hath likewise told us in the 2. Cor. 12.13. What then? It is true that God gave extraordinary gifts in those days, even to the healing of the sick, and curing of the diseased; in which regard S. Paul being blind through the bright lustre of the vision, is cured when Ananias comes & lays his hands upon him; and is also filled with the holy Ghost, which seems to be for the strengthening of him after his conversion, and for his settlement in Religion and the saith of Christ: for we see that it was done by the special appointment of God, and not so much before he went abroad to preach, as before he was received into the Church by holy Baptism: yea, the whole business was extraordinary, even in respect of the instrument, who had an immediate direction and an extraorinary gift, to do in this all that he did, be it for what it will. And as for them at Antioch, they were not only teachers, but Prophets by whom the Holy Ghost declared likewise that they must separate Barnabas and Saul from the rest of the Ministers or Disciples there, and not now make them Ministers; that they were before: yet because they must be gone from them, and go further abroad among the Gentiles, they solemnly commend them to the grace of God: for they fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, and let them go; the express words of the text: so that this may be rather termed a Manumission, than an Ordination. And all this while the way is plain.  
But there is yet a place in the first Epistle to Timothy, chap. 4. verse 14. which is also urged to prove, that Presbyters may ordain; the words being taken by some as if Timothy received his consecration into holy Orders by the hands of Presbyters. But if Saint Paul may be suffered to be his own interpreter, he afterward shows us, that this was otherwise: for I put thee in remembrance (saith he) that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the laying on of my hands, 2 Tim. 1.6. His then were the hands that ordained Timothy; and according thereunto is the charge that he also gave to the said Timothy, when he bade him Lay hands suddenly upon no man: there being no one word to invest every ordinary Presbyter with the like power. What is it then? The text objected saith not, Neglect not the gift that is in thee, etc. by the imposition of the hands of the Presbyters; nor by the imposition of the hands of a Presbytery: but by the imposition of the hands of Presbytery; that is, by the laying upon thee the hands of Ordination, termed the hands of Presbytery or Priesthood, because that's the office into which the party consecrated is then ordained: more than which cannot be fairly gathered thence, especially seeing the Apostle doth so clearly put the matter out of doubt, by saying that his were the hands that ordained Timothy, as in that before I have already showed. And indeed if Timothy were ordained by a Presbytery, then by more than one: but Saint Paul in that other place hath said, that his hands (and no other) were imposed on him. Nor is this but granted, even by Calvin himself, to be the right sense of the place; as in the fourth book of his Institutions, at the third Chapter, is manifest.  
But leaving Timothy, look next at Titus: the large Island of Crete is expressly committed to his peculiar charge, in which were many Cities, and he expressly said to be set over them all, no mention being made of any other. For, For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest put in order the things that are wanting, and ordain Presbyters in every City, as I appointed thee, Tit. 1.5. Titus was therefore a Bishop at the least, and hath the power of Ordination; as in this first testimony is more than manifest. Besides, it is to Titus that the authority is given to stop the mouths of false teachers, and to convince them sharply that they may be sound in the faith, verse 11.13. And again, upon him is the charge laid to reject an heretic, after he had been once or twice admonished, as in the third Chapter, at the tenth verse. So then, though the Diocese was large, and the Clergy numerous, yet he is in power above them all. Idem Ministerium, sed diversa potestas.  
But come we next to the Seven Churches of Asia, which are ruled by their Seven Angels, although at the same time they had in them their other Pastors. All (as one speaketh) were Angels in respect of their Ministry; one was the Angel in respect of his fixed superiority. For the Apostles that planted Churches in Cities, left them to one Bishop; and the rule is according to God's word, that there be one Angel to watch over the City and Country belonging to it: and so we see it here in these Seven Churches, where each Angel answers for the whole City, as one Temple committed to him. And therefore (as is worthily avouched) the Pope that will be over all Cities, and Diotrephes that will be under none, that is, he who rejects equals, and he that receives no superiors, are equally proud of an unjust pre-eminence.  
The evasion which some have sought, is very poor; to one, that is (say they) to more; To one Angel, that is collectively to more Angels than one. But to what purpose is it to insist any where upon propriety of speech, if a man may as he pleaseth, take such a lawless liberty of construction: for (without doubt) no more are the Seven Angels to be taken collectively, then are the seven Churches: of both which Christ himself hath said, The seven Stars are the Angels of the seven Churches, and the seven Candlesticks that thou sawest, are the seven Churches, Rev. 1.20. And then afterwards, these seven Churches are likewise named, both at the 11. verse of that first Chapter, as also in the two next Chapters that follow, and shown to be these, viz. Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamus, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia and Laodicea.  
In a word, the approvements, charges and challenges here made, are personal, and easy to be distinguished from the speeches directed to others of the same Church: as in example may be seen in that which is said both to the Angel and to them of Smyrna; where first the graces of that Angel are acknowledged, and then to those of his Church is said, that the Devil should cast some of them into prison, and that they should be tried, and endure tribulation ten days; wherein they are in general premonished of the persecution that should befall them: And then addressing to the Angel of the Church in particular, the speech is to him in the singular, saying, Be thou faithful unto the death. And so indeed he was; for Polycarpus was then the Angel of Smyrna, and died Bishop there, being crowned with the royal wreath of Martyrdom, about the year of our Lord 170. which was 86. years after he began to be Bishop, and to serve God in that charge; the head of this beginning reaching up to the year of Christ 84. which was ten years before S. john received his Revelation: he is poor in reading that shall deny it, and rich in wrangling that will not grant it, making thereby Ireneus and Eusebius of no better credit than the histories of Tom Thumb and Garagantua. Nor is it but greatly worth the marking, with what an admirable constancy that blessed Martyr continued faithful, as Eusebius largely tells the story: by which (without doubt) he set a clear Comment upon the Text, in sticking so closely to his heavenly admonition.  
I will instance in no more, although the like may be seen in some of the rest; especially in that which was said to the Angel of the Church of Thyatyra, who (notwithstanding those good parts, services and graces which were commended in him) is not a little taxed in this; viz. that he suffered the woman jezabel. For mark how the words run, Thou sufferest the woman jezabel, (who calleth herself a Prophetess) to teach and seduce my servants, etc. Now (as one worthily) were he but an ordinary Presbyter, unarmed with power, how could he help it? Or why should he be charged with what he could not redress? A A little Brass, or Copper well rubbed and furbished, may glitter like gold; but here are more than shows and probabilities of imparity amongst Christ's Ministers, clear testimonies of supereminent and jurisdictive power; as from first to last, in these few lines hath been truly made apparent. Episcopacy is therefore of no other than Divine Institution, and was first begun by our blessed Saviour in his twelve Apostles: it hath been continued ever since by the governing of the Church with Bishops, who are in this the Apostles successors, and to be continued till the end of the world. He that shall deny it, had need to look better about him: for (setting aside some prerogatives and privileges, peculiar only to them who were the first Apostles) their calling could not be extraordinary: for if it were, then how could Christ be with them until the end of the world? But lo (saith he) I am with you always, even unto the end of the world, Matth. 28.26.  
And now after all this, I could further back the whole with testimonies of the Ancient: but the Scriptures are clear enough without them. And yet, to give truth the greater lustre, I shall collect some few (besides what of this nature hath been already) and briefly set them down.  
S. Hierom shall be first, who expounding these words in the 44. Psalms, namely, that In the stead of Fathers thou shalt have Children, breaks forth into these words: Fuerint (O Ecclesia) Apostoli patres tui, quia ipsi te genuerunt; Nunc autem, quia illi recesserunt à mundo, habes pro his Episcopos silios: that is, O Church, the Apostles were thy Fathers, because they begat thee: But now because they have left the world; thou hast in their stead Bishops, and they are sons. The same doth also S. Austin note upon the foresaid Psalm. Quidest (saith he) pro patribus tuis nati sunt tibi filii? Patres missisunt Apostoli; pro Apostolis filii nati sunt tibi, constituti sunt Episcopi. S. Hierom again Catol. Script. Eccles. Epist. ad Evagr. Com. in Matth. in Proem. & in Praefat. in Marc. (though no fast friend) hath left recorded, that Bishops in Alexandria began whilst many of the Apostles were aliye; as S. Peter and S. Paul, S. James and S. Mark: which last, I mean S. Mark, is by the confession of the said Father, granted to be the first Bishop there.  
Saint Ambrose could say, upon Gal. 1.18. that S. Paul saw James at jerusalem, because he was made Bishop of that place by the Apostles. So also saith Eusebius, in his second book of Ecclesiastical History, at the first and 23. Chapters.  
Ireneus saith, in his third Book and third Chapter against Heresies, that he could reckon who were Bishops from the Apostles to his own times.  
Eusebius is able to do the like; and in express terms saith, that Timothy and Titus were the first Bishops of Ephesus and Crete, Eccles. Hist. l. 3. c. 4.  
The subscriptions at the end of two of S. Paul's Epistles, have also said it: and though no part of the Text, yet of age enough to bear witness with the rest.  
But come we to Ignatius, a man who was not only one of S. John's Disciples, but a faithful Martyr, and one that had likewise seen Christ in the flesh: and he, in his first Epistle, saith: Quid enim aliud est Episcopus, quam is, qui omni principatu & potestate superior est. And a little after, Quid vero Presbyterium aliud est, quam sacer catus, Conciliarii & Assessores Episcopi? Quid vero Diaconi, quam im●…itatores angelicarum virtutum, purum est inculpatum Ministerium illi ministrantes? Meaning in the general, that a Bishop is superior to his Bench of Presbyters; they next to him; and the Deacons inferior to both. Lo then, here we have three orders, which he likewise showeth a little before; and esteems them no better than out of the Church, who will not obey their Bishop in the first place, and then the rest accordingly. Also in his Epistle add Magnesios', he rejoiceth in them that obey their Bishop. He also saith. That neither Presbyter nor Deacon, nor Lay man, can do any thing (viz. in matters Ecclesiastical) without their Bishop.  
And in his Epistle ad Philadelphenses, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: id est, Episcopo attendite, & Presbyteris, & Diaconis, Obey your Bishop, Presbyters and Deacons. And in the same Epistle a little after, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: Do nothing without your Bishop.  
The like to which he writeth to those of Smyrna▪ and in the the same Epistle saith, he saw our Saviour Christ after his Resurrection. The same doth Saint Hierom also witness of the same Father, in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers. And in the foresaid Epistle he willeth That the Layman be subject to the Deacons, the Deacons to the Bishop, the Bishop to Christ, as Christ is to his Father. And in his Epistle to Polycarpus (the Angel of Smyrna) Let nothing (saith he) be done without thy mind; neither do thou any thing without the mind of God. And in his Epistle to the Ephesians, Studete (dilecti) obedire Episcopo, etc. Study (beloved) to obey your Bishop. Nor doth he but name who was the Bishop of that Church then; viz. Onesimus, mentioned likewise in the Scripture.  
But I have done. And now, if this which hath been said, be not sufficient to prove the Divine right of Episcopacy, I must for ever acknowledge the Stars to be more glorious than the Sun, and Glow-worms to carry more fire and light in their tails, than the greatest flame: which, till I want my senses, I will never do. Yea, by this it appeareth, how wrongfully our Dialogue-writer hath alleged, that there were no other Bishops then ordinary Preachers of God's word, until 334. years after Christ: which false tenet we may find at the 27. page of his Book.  
And know moreover, that whilst my answer to this present Dialogue of his, was at the Press, there came to my hands a new Edition of his book, containing still the same things (excepting some one or two left out) but here and there chopped and changed in their order from what they were in that which I first received, and intermingled likewise with a few weak Additions, and scurrilous rail against the government of the Church by Bishops, as Antichristian, affirming that they themselves are Antichrists, & that the Clergy of England are like those of the Church of Laodicea, neither hot nor cold, but lukewarm: All which (with what else his new Edition hath afforded) he might very well and wisely have spared, until he had found himself fully able to defend his first writings: which because he cannot, the rest will fall of itself, without any further answer; especially seeing there is very little or nothing more than what will come within the compass of this.   
FINIS.